Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1340803668-31686-1-git-send-email-michal.labedzki@tieto.com> From: Lucas De Marchi Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 13:22:54 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/14] AVRCP: Update constants To: Michal.Labedzki@tieto.com Cc: luiz.dentz@gmail.com, linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, lucas.demarchi@profusion.mob, johan.hedberg@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Michal, On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 11:25 AM, wrote: > Hi Luiz, > > >> Haven't I nak the changes to enum before? What have you changed in v2? >> >>-- >> Luiz Augusto von Dentz > > No. According to Lucas I removed unused constants. > What wrong with enum? Look into sap.h, vhci.h, reporter.h, parser.h, cups.h and... avrcp.c ("enum battery_status" is here) I strongly NACKed this before. Not only because of the unused constants. > > I have idea to make enum new convention in BlueZ. See sap.h - it looks very clearly for me. Pros for used enum is that enum can be thread as group of constants, mostly constants defined in specification. But "magic constants" should stay define - mostly defined by developer. > Disadvantage for "define" is that as you can see in BlueZ AVRCP - you must use additional comment to describe group of constants. I don't see any advantage in being able to group them. You still have to define the name by prefixing it with the namespace. If it was already enum, fine - changing for the sake of change only is not good. > > Luiz, why "nak"? Could you present your point of view? IMO this change doesn't give us anything Lucas De Marchi