Hi Kees,
you are right, the current interface does not support 16-bit registers.
We are however overhauling the I2C interface as we speak, and the
re-worked interface does have support for them (see [1]). Feel free to
take a look and comment on the proposal!
Cheers,
Hauke
[1] https://github
Dear rolling IoTlers,
as far I'm concerned it has been an undocumented coding convention so far to
use `int` or `unsigned int` for iterator variables in a loop instead of fixed
width integer types. Does anybody object to adding this to the coding
conventions explicitly?
Cheers,
Oleg
--
The probl
Hi,
Am 12. Oktober 2016 09:48:28 MESZ, schrieb Oleg Hahm :
>Dear rolling IoTlers,
>
>as far I'm concerned it has been an undocumented coding convention so
>far to
>use `int` or `unsigned int` for iterator variables in a loop instead of
>fixed
>width integer types. Does anybody object to adding t
Hi,
Am 10/12/2016 um 12:57 PM schrieb Ludwig Knüpfer:
Hi,
Am 12. Oktober 2016 09:48:28 MESZ, schrieb Oleg Hahm :
Dear rolling IoTlers,
as far I'm concerned it has been an undocumented coding convention so
far to
use `int` or `unsigned int` for iterator variables in a loop instead of
fixed
w
Am Wed, 12 Oct 2016 16:33:11 +0200
schrieb Martin :
> Am 10/12/2016 um 12:57 PM schrieb Ludwig Knüpfer:
> > Am 12. Oktober 2016 09:48:28 MESZ, schrieb Oleg Hahm
> > :
> >> as far I'm concerned it has been an undocumented coding convention so
> >> far to use `int` or `unsigned int` for iterator v
Hi!
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:57:50PM +0200, Ludwig Knüpfer wrote:
> Am 12. Oktober 2016 09:48:28 MESZ, schrieb Oleg Hahm :
> >as far I'm concerned it has been an undocumented coding convention so far
> >to use `int` or `unsigned int` for iterator variables in a loop instead of
> >fixed width int
Hi,
Am 10/12/2016 um 04:37 PM schrieb Oleg Hahm:
Hi!
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:57:50PM +0200, Ludwig Knüpfer wrote:
Am 12. Oktober 2016 09:48:28 MESZ, schrieb Oleg Hahm :
as far I'm concerned it has been an undocumented coding convention so far
to use `int` or `unsigned int` for iterator va
Hi Martin!
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 04:52:37PM +0200, Landsmann, Martin wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:57:50PM +0200, Ludwig Knüpfer wrote:
> > > Am 12. Oktober 2016 09:48:28 MESZ, schrieb Oleg Hahm
> > > :
> > > > as far I'm concerned it has been an undocumented coding convention so
> > >
Hi,
On 10/12/2016 04:44 PM, René Kijewski wrote:
`size_t` is optimal for every architecture that does not use segmented memory.
... when iterating over array indices. Otherwise the width of it is as
uncertain (in respect to the underlying platform) as "unsigned int".
IMHO there's no need fo
Am 10/12/2016 um 05:00 PM schrieb Oleg Hahm:
Hi Martin!
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 04:52:37PM +0200, Landsmann, Martin wrote:
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:57:50PM +0200, Ludwig Knüpfer wrote:
Am 12. Oktober 2016 09:48:28 MESZ, schrieb Oleg Hahm :
as far I'm concerned it has been an undocumented
10 matches
Mail list logo
