On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 10:38:03PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 07:45:16PM +0100, Vasileios Amoiridis wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 01:07:07PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 01:29:24AM +0100, Vasileios Amoiridis wrote: > > ... > > > > > +enum bmp280_scan { > > > > + BMP280_TEMP, > > > > + BMP280_PRESS, > > > > + BME280_HUMID > > > > > > The last is not a terminator, please leave trailing comma. > > > > > > > +}; > > > > What do you mean it is not a terminator? In general with the enum > > variables I would write: > > > > enum var { a, b, c }; > > This example is different to what you used. I.o.w. _this_ example is okay. > > > Why in this case there is a comma needed after the BME280_HUMID element? > > It's pure style issue that helps to avoid the unneeded churn in the future in > case the list is getting expanded. You can easily imagine what I mean. > Ok, that definitely makes sense, thank you! In general, should this be applied to structs as well? > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko > >