DINPUT: Generic FF effect implementation (FF #4)

[Daniel Remenak]

Submitted #5 a couple days ago, along with a short explanation of how
it all worked together.  Any comments?  If you'd like me to change the
architecture I'm willing to do so, if you can give me some hints about
what direction to go with it.  If you want some other changes made,
please drop some clues about what they might be.  If you want to see
more, I have more that can be cleaned up for submission.  If you need
more clarification on some issue I can give it.  I just loathe sitting
around wondering if these are good enough or not when I could be
working more on them if they need revision or the next batch if they
don't ;)

--Daniel Remenak

On 8/10/05, Alexandre Julliard <julliard at winehq.org> wrote:
> Daniel Remenak <dtremenak at gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Could I get some feedback on why this has not been applied?  I've got
> > several additional patches prepared already that depend on it and if
> > something needs to be changed I'd like to know before I get even more
> > that do.  It still applies cleanly to CVS.  If it's just not being
> > applied because it's considered dead code I can submit the other
> > patches that actually use it.
> 
> That would be good. The pseudo vtbl functions that are not used in a
> vtbl don't look right to me, but I'm not sure what you are planning to
> do with that.
> 
> --
> Alexandre Julliard
> julliard at winehq.org
>