Re: PWM API, new features should be driver specific or not?

Awesome indeed! On Fri, 09 Mar 2018 10:32:49 -0800 "Sterling Hughes" wrote: > Awesome, thanks @mlaz. > > On 8 Mar 2018, at 21:00, Miguel Azevedo wrote: > > > Hi Markus, and everyone else, > > > > My proposal for changes on our PWM API is on this PR (most

Re: Question regarding exchanging long characteristic values over BLE

Hi Simon, On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 9:18 AM, Simon Ratner wrote: > Old thread, but I just bumped into this myself so want to resurrect it. > > Current api makes it very difficult to implement a long characteristic that > changes frequently (e.g. time- or sensor-based reading, or

Re: Question regarding exchanging long characteristic values over BLE

Hi Simon, On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 12:18:41AM -0800, Simon Ratner wrote: > Old thread, but I just bumped into this myself so want to resurrect it. > > Current api makes it very difficult to implement a long characteristic that > changes frequently (e.g. time- or sensor-based reading, or including

Re: recommendations for IO pin declarations

Do folks think having a pin_t type makes sense where the function of the pin can be stored in a standard way? I could see an argument for this — obviously we couldn’t change all the code at once, but we could start by adding that, and then slowly migrate to it. On 8 Mar 2018, at 23:04,

Re: PWM API, new features should be driver specific or not?

Awesome, thanks @mlaz. On 8 Mar 2018, at 21:00, Miguel Azevedo wrote: Hi Markus, and everyone else, My proposal for changes on our PWM API is on this PR (most recent commit): https://github.com/apache/mynewt-core/pull/836 I think it takes care of the oversized unorganized datastructure