I didn't know how much overhead there would be. I suppose it is good how it is now. User can do alias anyways.
include big_calendar alias time is bigcal_current_time alias date is bigcal_current_date time.second = 0 time.minute = 0 time.hour = 8 date.day = 1 date.month = 1 date.year = 2012 forever loop delay_1s(1) time.second = time.second + 1 bigcal_update_current() end loop Matt. On Apr 19, 1:39 am, Oliver Seitz <[email protected]> wrote: > > Maybe bigcal_update_current could be > > changed to > > bigcal_update_current(bigcal_timetype in time, > > bigcal_datetype in > > date). This way you can name them whatever you like. > > Good point, I've been thinking about this, too. It's not "in time, in date" > but both are "in&out". This is quite some overhead, moving seven bytes back > and forth to a procedure, which always works on the same variables. (it makes > no sense to use it on more than one set of variables). > > I wanted to build my own RTCC, from a watch crystal, a very small PIC, and > optionally a supercapacitor for power cuts. Therefore I wanted to keep the > basic things small and fast. I wouldn't want to be forced to use a bigger > controller or waste precious capacitor energy, just because of some variable > naming conventions. > > I can use a private version, of course... But is this the spirit? > > Greets, > Kiste -- 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.
