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

[Frank M. H. <fm...@sp...>]

On Monday 15 September 2008 12:44, Dan Lenski wrote:
> * 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?

Yes

> Should we keep the terse 
> names or the long names?

I slightly prefer the long names, but either way is fine.

> * 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...

Ok