Re: [chirp_devel] [resolved] Inverted Boolean Help Needed

I figured out what the issue was. Apparently I was reading the wrong value, inverting it and then stuffing it into the "beep_tone" setting.

Jim KC9HI

On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 3:30 AM, IZ3GME Marco iz3gme.marco@gmail.comwrote:

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