[chirp_devel] [PATCH 3 of 3] Add a test to look for contradictions in radio_features

[Dan Smith]

> But according to the usage matrix the _check_rx_dtcs is wrong as the 
> check shoud be:
> 
> 	if "DTCS->DTCS" in cross_mode and not rf.has_rx_dtcs:
> 
> being "DTCS->DTCS" the only case where has_rx_dtcs is mandatory.

Ah, perhaps here is where the confusion is I think that any mode with
->DTCS should use rx_dtcs, not just DTCS->DTCS. Otherwise, it's hard for
the user to understand why he uses "DTCS Code" for TX and "RX DTCS Code"
for RX in the DTCS->DTCS case and "DTCS Code" for TX or RX in all the
other cases. Similarly, I think it requires too much logic to be
embedded in every driver to remember this.

Instead, it's much easier (I think) to say "if
cross_mode.endswith("->DTCS"), then use rx_dtcs as the code".

I guess I didn't pay attention to the rx_dtcs changes to the wiki when
you made them, but the "if it has rx_dtcs do X otherwise do Y" logic is
too confusing.

What do you think?

-- 
Dan Smith
www.danplanet.com
KK7DS



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://intrepid.danplanet.com/pipermail/chirp_devel/attachments/20120703/b4700e6d/attachment-0001.bin