Re: [Linux-gpib-general] Python bindings (patch)

[Dan L. <dl...@gm...>]

On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 19:29:06 -0400, Frank Mori Hess wrote:
> If I dropped anything else from the patches, it might just be an
> oversight.
> 
> Also, I haven't actually tested the changes beyond making sure it
> compiles.

One other small problem with Keith's patch: in case of EDRV or EFSO, it 
looks at the "errno" variable rather than ibcnt/ThreadIbcnt(), which gives 
wrong error numbers on my system at least.

I'm working on some more cleanup of the code, adding documentation strings 
to all the functions, etc.

There are a couple inconsistencies in the Python module which I'm not sure 
how to resolve:

* Function naming: some function names are expanded, e.g. ibwrt() -> 
gpib.write, while others are left in their terse form, e.g. ibtrg() -> 
gpib.trg().  Should these be named uniformly?  Should we keep the terse 
names or the long names?

* Return values: some Python functions return their C return values (e.g. 
the wrappers for ibdev(), ibfind(), ibwait()).  Others get the interesting 
return value from a C pointer, e.g. the wrappers for ibrd(), ibln(), ibask
(), etc.  That's all well and good I think.  But many of the Python 
functions return *nothing* for no apparent reason.  Should these just 
return ibsta as in C?  There's no downside to this...

Dan