Re: [RFC] libgpiod public API reviews needed

[Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 05:29:02PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> 2018-01-23 15:15 GMT+01:00 Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 02:28:40PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I would like to release libgpiod v1.0 soon (preferably before FOSDEM
> >> 2018). The first version (v0.x series) was written in a matter of two
> >> weeks and the API was not well designed. Since v0.3 release I've been
> >> working on redesigning the public API to make it simplier and more
> >> useful.
> >>
> >> I want to commit to a stable interface for the library starting from
> >> v1.0 but it would be great if I could get some reviews first - it's
> >> basically only about reviewing a single public header: include/gpiod.h
> >> in which all public symbols are documented. Any implementation details
> >> can always be changed later.
> >>
> >> The most prominent changes since 0.3 include:
> >> - removal of custom error handling in favor of errnos
> >> - merge of two separate interfaces for event requests and regular line requests
> >> - redesign of the simple API
> >> - addition of a bunch of helpers for line requests
> >> - redesign of the iterator API
> >> - making the use of prefixes more consistent
> >> - renaming of symbols all over the place
> >> - and various minor tweaks
> >>
> >> As far as usefulness goes - the user space tools that are included all
> >> use this API and it looks pretty clean.
> >>
> >> The project is hosted at kernel.org:
> >>
> >>     https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/libs/libgpiod/libgpiod.git/
> >>
> >> and the code that needs review is on the master branch.
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance to anyone who'll find the time to take a look.
> >>
> >
> > Thanks for your work, I am using your library and I am trying to promote it.
> >
> > Some people were confused concerning the naming when requesting line(s)
> > as output. 'init_val(s)' may be better than 'default_val(s)'.
> >
> 
> Now I'm seeing that default_val(s) is the name used both within the
> kernel and in the linux user API. I'll leave it like this then to not
> confuse users.

I understand, you can mention it in the param description, it should be
enough.

Regards

Ludovic
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html