Re: [PATCH 4/6] staging: pi433: Rename enum optionOnOff in rf69_enum.h

[Simon SandstrÃm]

On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 09:22:06PM +0200, Marcus Wolf wrote:
> 
> 
> Am 04.12.2017 um 21:15 schrieb Dan Carpenter:
> > 
> > That's a bad name, because it doesn't just enable it also disables.
> > Please split them.
> > 
> > regards,
> > dan carpenter
> > 
> > 
> 
> Same applies to all other stuff, that's using optionOnOff:
> rf69_set_sync_enable(optionOn/Off) enables and disbales sync,
> rf69_set_crc_enable(optionOn/Off) enables and disables crc,
> ...
> 
> In my opinion, if we want perfect clarity, we should stay with optionOnOff.
> If we are ok, if rf69_set_sync_enable(false) disables sync,
> in my opinion, we also have to be ok, if rf69_set_amp_X_enable(false)
> disables the amp.
> 
> Cheers,
> Marcus

Hi,

I agree with Dan. rf69_enable_sync() / rf69_disable_sync() is clear. If
there are more functions like this (e.g. for crc) then we'll just split
those functions as well.

If you really want one single function for enabling/disabling then I
think that you need to find a better name. Something like
rf69_set_sync_operation(bool), rf69_set_crc_operation(bool), etc.


Regards,
Simon