> Maybe bigcal_update_current could be > changed to > bigcal_update_current(bigcal_timetype in time, > bigcal_datetype in > date). This way you can name them whatever you like.
Good point, I've been thinking about this, too. It's not "in time, in date" but both are "in&out". This is quite some overhead, moving seven bytes back and forth to a procedure, which always works on the same variables. (it makes no sense to use it on more than one set of variables). I wanted to build my own RTCC, from a watch crystal, a very small PIC, and optionally a supercapacitor for power cuts. Therefore I wanted to keep the basic things small and fast. I wouldn't want to be forced to use a bigger controller or waste precious capacitor energy, just because of some variable naming conventions. I can use a private version, of course... But is this the spirit? Greets, Kiste -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.
