Actually, should they be changed to eeprom_24lcxxx_......jal ?

On Apr 24, 8:18 pm, mattschinkel <[email protected]> wrote:
> For naming, I would just go with eeprom_24lc256_extended.jal. I don't
> mind changing the original to _simple, but if we do it with this one
> the same should be done in the future on other libs.
>
> Matt.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"jallib" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.

Reply via email to