There are probably instances where 1kHz isn't fast enough for certain
sensor types:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mynewt-core/compare/develop...sensors_branch#diff-ec052d973c26072d9ac2e198f16e764aR226
/**
* Poll rate in MS for this sensor.
*/
uint32_t s_poll_rate;
Havin
Hi Sterling,
One other important question is what happens when we don't respect the
read request intervals between data samples?
In the accel sim (really nice to see sim examples, BTW ... that's
extremely useful to test sensor algorithms), you just check the number
of missing samples from th
Hi Sterling,
Nice to see this starting to take shape, and looks very good so far!
I onder if instead of having 30 different sensor types for
triplets/vectors like this:
/**
* Meters per second squared.
*
* 32-bit signed integer, with 0x reserved for unused.
*/
#define
Hi,
I’ve added initial support for a sensors API to mynewt in a branch off
develop called “sensors_branch.” You can find a full diff here, or
pull the source code directly:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mynewt-core/compare/develop...sensors_branch
I’ll caveat that this API needs work,
Well, if we are talking about deleting the startup task I dont see how that is
much different than malloc; I might be missing something though. If we are
talking about designating a startup task and that stack always stays with that
task, I get that… of course, you hope that the task normally re
> On Dec 11, 2016, at 11:21 AM, Sterling Hughes wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>>
>>> On Dec 11, 2016, at 10:55 AM, Christopher Collins
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 10:11:44AM -0800, will sanfilippo wrote:
Personally, I keep wanting to try and have the OS start up right away.
>>>
>>>
Hi Greg,
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 08:45:17PM -0600, Greg Stein wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I was looking at prior releases, and noticed that the final step to publish
> the release appears to have been done wrong. No harm done, but suboptimal.
>
> It appears the release artifacts were *added* into
> rel
I also tried to use lldb for a few days, and decided that gdb setup is still
worth the
trouble.
> On Dec 10, 2016, at 10:12 PM, Sterling Hughes wrote:
>
> Ugh.
>
> I’ve been using lldb for most of the day, and it’s… fine. Certainly it has
> improved over the years. We might consider switchi
