On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 12:07 PM Sebastian Huber <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > > On 21/07/2021 20:00, Gedare Bloom wrote: > >> + /** > >> + * @brief This member is true, if the interrupt vector may be enabled by > >> + * rtems_interrupt_vector_enable(), otherwise it is false. > >> + * > >> + * When an interrupt vector may be enabled, this means that the enabled > >> state > >> + * may be changed from disabled to enabled and from enabled to enabled. > >> The > > s/may/might > > It is more proper to say "might" when something "might not". "may" and > > "can" are close synonyms, but "maybe" is closer to "might" in usage. > > English is still terrible. > > > > For the tests we need two variants. One (currently "can") for which it > is certain that the operation is successful. Another one (currently > "maybe") for which the the operation could be successful or unsatisfied. > > For the "may_be_triggered_by_message" I would like to express that > messages can trigger the interrupt, however, there may be also other > triggers like signals or software. > Ok, i think this use of "may" actually does cover the difference. It's just subtle. I'm fine with it here.
> -- > embedded brains GmbH > Herr Sebastian HUBER > Dornierstr. 4 > 82178 Puchheim > Germany > email: sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de > phone: +49-89-18 94 741 - 16 > fax: +49-89-18 94 741 - 08 > > Registergericht: Amtsgericht München > Registernummer: HRB 157899 > Vertretungsberechtigte Geschäftsführer: Peter Rasmussen, Thomas Dörfler > Unsere Datenschutzerklärung finden Sie hier: > https://embedded-brains.de/datenschutzerklaerung/ _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
