Use saner names for the pin attributes #4
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
I think that `d_or_c` is as confusing as `dc`, possibly more, when the parameter is still called `dc`. If we wanted to be hyper-correct and stick to Python's style, we should call it `data_or_command`, but then for consistency we would also need things like `master_in_slave_out` and so on, and I think this is an overkill. Since the pin is usually labelled `dc` on the physical modules anyways, I think it's perfectly fine to use that — it's also consistent with the usage in Arduino and other drivers. I added `_pin` so make the linter shut up and also to clarify that this is indeed a pin. I also changed the name of `res` to `reset_pin` to be consistent (the label for that pin on the modules is sometimes `rs` and sometimes `rst` so keeping the shortcut is not helpful).
|
Woud you be willing to add a docstring to |
|
Added that. |
kattni
approved these changes
Dec 16, 2017
|
Tested successfully with display. |
tannewt
pushed a commit
to adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_Bundle
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 17, 2017
Updating https://github.com/adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_CircuitPlayground to 1.0.1 from 1.0.0: > Merge pull request adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_CircuitPlayground#25 from adafruit/tannewt-patch-1 Updating https://github.com/adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_MPR121 to 1.0.1 from 0.1.2: > Merge pull request adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_MPR121#4 from adafruit/travis-yaml-typo > Merge pull request adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_MPR121#3 from tannewt/lint Updating https://github.com/adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_PCF8523 to 1.0.0 from 0.1.1: > Merge pull request adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_PCF8523#4 from tannewt/lint Updating https://github.com/adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_SSD1306 to 2.1.0 from 2.0.0: > Merge pull request adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_SSD1306#4 from deshipu/patch-1 Updating https://github.com/adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_TSL2561 to 3.0.0 from 2.0: > Merge pull request adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_TSL2561#9 from kattni/driver-lint-update > Merge pull request adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_TSL2561#7 from tannewt/lint Updating https://github.com/adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_HID to 2.0.0 from 1.1.0: > Merge pull request adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_HID#8 from mrmcwethy/lint Updating https://github.com/adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_SimpleIO to 1.0.0 from 0.3.1: > add pylint to project and updated code Updating https://github.com/adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_Waveform to 1.0.0 from 0.1.1: > add pylint to project (adafruit/Adafruit_CircuitPython_Waveform#1)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I think that
d_or_cis as confusing asdc, possibly more, when the parameter is still calleddc. If we wanted to be hyper-correct and stick to Python's style, we should call itdata_or_command, but then for consistency we would also need things likemaster_in_slave_outand so on, and I think this is an overkill. Since the pin is usually labelleddcon the physical modules anyways, I think it's perfectly fine to use that — it's also consistent with the usage in Arduino and other drivers. I added_pinto make the linter be quiet and also to clarify that this is indeed a pin. I also changed the name ofrestoreset_pinto be consistent (the label for that pin on the modules is sometimesrsand sometimesrstso keeping the shortcut is not helpful).