Re: [PATCH v2 06/11] staging: pi433: Split rf69_set_crc_enabled into two functions

[Marcus Wolf]

>>
>> rf69 -set/get - action
>> -> rf69_set_crc_enable
>
> No...  Simon's name is better.  His is shorter and makes more sense.


I disagree. If I am going to implement a new functionality and need to 
think about the naming of the function name, every time I need to change 
a register setting that's awfull.

I usually have code on one monitor and datasheet on the other. So if I 
want to set a bit/reg/whatever, I have the datasheet in front of my 
nose. I can easy write the code, if function names refer to the names in 
the datasheet and follow a strict naming convention. If the naming 
convetion is broken, I need to switch to the header and search manually 
for each register, I want to set.


There is so much potential in this young driver, that could be 
developed. Would be pitty, if all that wouldn't take place some day.


Marcus