On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 12:25:31PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Both "bits.e" and "BIT_CHK(bits, LCD_BIT_E_MASK)" are terrible. The new
> one is worse because it takes more words to tell you nothing and because
> it is wrong since E is a flag not a mask.
Yep, I agree. Maybe simply renaming "bits" to "lcd_pin" in the original
code would make it more obvious what the original ones meant.
Isaac BTW, if you only want to shrink the structure, you can do it using
a single bit per pin this way :
struct {
char e:1;
char rw:1;
char rs:1;
char sda:1;
char scl:1;
...
} pins;
Sorry I don't remember exactly the list of pins, but you get the idea.
Willy
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
