Re: [chirp_devel] Inverted Boolean Help Needed

Don't have the time to test myself but I would check in the direction of type conversion: check the type of the variable and eventually replace "NOT" with appropriate comparision (eg == 0)

my two cents 73 de IZ3GME Marco

On 21/01/2014 04:09, Jim Unroe wrote:

On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Jens J. <kd4tjx@yahoo.com mailto:kd4tjx@yahoo.com> wrote:

Not that this fixes your specific problem, but I have run into a few
different settings which have this sort of "inverted" logic.
To keep things simple in the rest of the code, I just name the
setting appropriately so that the logic in the rest of the program
need not be inverted, e.g., name your setting foo_disable if value
of True/1 disables foo, and foo_enable if True/1 enables foo.

I think it makes it easier to read.
"beep_tone" is a boolean?
If I'm reading that "beep_tone_disabled" seems like it would be a
much more meaningful name for the setting field.

Jens,

That makes sense. If I can figure out how to fix this, I can change that too.

Jim

---

chirp_devel mailing list chirp_devel@intrepid.danplanet.com http://intrepid.danplanet.com/mailman/listinfo/chirp_devel Developer docs: http://chirp.danplanet.com/projects/chirp/wiki/Developers