On Sun, 3 Jan 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > >> ret = regmap_update_bits(data->regmap, ABB5ZES3_REG_TIM_CLK, > >> - mask, ABB5ZES3_REG_TIM_CLK_TAC1); > >> + ABB5ZES3_REG_TIM_CLK_TAC0 > >> + | ABB5ZES3_REG_TIM_CLK_TAC1, > >> + ABB5ZES3_REG_TIM_CLK_TAC1); > > > > This doesn't seem like an improvement. > > Interesting … > > > > The concept (mask) has disappeared, > > I suggest to drop another local variable. > Can the operator "Bitwise OR" be sufficient to indicate the concept "mask"? > > > > the binary operation is strangely broken, > > Do you prefer an other source code formatting within the usual line length range? > > > > and the function call has one more line of arguments, > > How should several long preprocessor symbols be combined together with indentation > so that they will fit into the limit of 80 characters? > > > > which all look sort of the same and thus are hard to understand. > > Is this an usual consequence from an ordinary name pattern? The original code was better. No 80 character problem, easy to distinguish one argument from another, moderately meaningful variable name, etc. julia
