Olliver Schinagl 於 2019年2月24日 週日 上午4:37寫道：
>
> On 23-02-2019 13:54, Axel Lin wrote:
> >> I will not disagree that it may be extra work to look up the define
> >> (especially if there is no tool tip or split view in the editor) but
> >> reading the whole lot of code, with only the magic values,
On 27-02-2019 21:05, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 08:41:46PM +0100, Olliver Schinagl wrote:
>> On 25-02-2019 18:25, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> If you find you need to describe what the fields are it would be much
>>> more constructive to add a comment at the top of the table saying what
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 08:41:46PM +0100, Olliver Schinagl wrote:
> On 25-02-2019 18:25, Mark Brown wrote:
> > If you find you need to describe what the fields are it would be much
> > more constructive to add a comment at the top of the table saying what
> > they are. As things are this isn't
On 25-02-2019 18:25, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 09:37:01PM +0100, Olliver Schinagl wrote:
>
>> In any case, you seem like a smart person that reads and writes hex and
>> bits often enough. This is not true for everyone. I can just as easily
>> reverse your arguments of course, for
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 09:37:01PM +0100, Olliver Schinagl wrote:
> In any case, you seem like a smart person that reads and writes hex and
> bits often enough. This is not true for everyone. I can just as easily
> reverse your arguments of course, for example, 'each field has a well
> known
On 23-02-2019 13:54, Axel Lin wrote:
>> I will not disagree that it may be extra work to look up the define
>> (especially if there is no tool tip or split view in the editor) but
>> reading the whole lot of code, with only the magic values, you still
>> have to look up the meaning of each magic
> I will not disagree that it may be extra work to look up the define
> (especially if there is no tool tip or split view in the editor) but
> reading the whole lot of code, with only the magic values, you still
> have to look up the meaning of each magic value, have to guess which one
> has the
On 21-02-2019 10:42, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 08:22:53AM +0800, Axel Lin wrote:
>> Olliver Schinagl 於 2019年2月21日 週四 上午6:57寫道：
>>> On February 20, 2019 5:50:13 PM GMT+01:00, Axel Lin
>>> wrote:
The AXP20X_xxx_START/END/STEPS defines make the code hard to read and
On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 08:22:53AM +0800, Axel Lin wrote:
> Olliver Schinagl 於 2019年2月21日 週四 上午6:57寫道：
> > On February 20, 2019 5:50:13 PM GMT+01:00, Axel Lin
> > wrote:
> > >The AXP20X_xxx_START/END/STEPS defines make the code hard to read and
> > >very hard to check the linear range settings
Olliver Schinagl 於 2019年2月21日 週四 上午6:57寫道：
>
> Hey Axel,
>
> On February 20, 2019 5:50:13 PM GMT+01:00, Axel Lin
> wrote:
> >The AXP20X_xxx_START/END/STEPS defines make the code hard to read and
> >very hard to check the linear range settings because it needs to check
> >the defines one-by-one.
Hey Axel,
On February 20, 2019 5:50:13 PM GMT+01:00, Axel Lin wrote:
>The AXP20X_xxx_START/END/STEPS defines make the code hard to read and
>very hard to check the linear range settings because it needs to check
>the defines one-by-one.
>The original code without the defines is very good in
The AXP20X_xxx_START/END/STEPS defines make the code hard to read and
very hard to check the linear range settings because it needs to check
the defines one-by-one.
The original code without the defines is very good in readability
as the meaning of each field of REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE is clear.
So
12 matches
Mail list logo
