On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Hannes Weisbach <[email protected]> wrote: > > Am 09.07.2012 um 16:01 schrieb Darell Tan: > >> Hi Hannes, >> >> Can I ask why you did not simply implement cmd_tpi, chip_erase, >> program_enable and initialize functions accordingly? > I did and I never said otherwise. I just don't like it, because it causes > much code duplication. Have a look at what bitbang_chip_erase does in the TPI > section and what usbasp_tpi_program_enable does.
I see, then I misunderstood you because you mentioned you "essentially copied the code from usbasp and renamed everything from usbasp to avrftdi" which includes usbasp_tpi_read/write_byte, usbasp_tpi_paged_read/write as well. As for common code, I think there could be a common chip_erase and program_enable (like avr_chip_erase or something). It may not be the best solution, but it's definitely better than having duplicate code in the different programmers. > > As far as I can tell your understanding of avrftdi and avrdude is correct :) > > Cheers, > Hannes _______________________________________________ avrdude-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avrdude-dev
