Re: [PATCH] regulator: axp20x: Get rid of AXP20X_xxx_START/END/STEPS defines

[Mark Brown]

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 helping anyone - as a big pile of
> > defines it's hard to read the values without context for how they're
> > used and if you're looking at the table you can't tell what the
> > regulator actually supports without going and decoding the defines.

> Then the name of the define should be more constructive, which imo they
> are reasonably? But as everything with programming, naming things is the
> he hardest part, right?

I really don't think that's it - I think that sometimes a data table is
just a data table.  There are some coding styles that work to avoid
having raw numbers anywhere in code outside of defines at all costs but
I do think that goes too far in cases like this where the name of the
define is at some level just going to summarize what should go in a
given slot in a table which adds little.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature