Re: Upgrades and backward compatibility
|
Hi Allison:
The JackAl system is a bit unusual because the user and the programmer might be the same person. So when you said refactoring, to me that meant the user might be changing things, but you're right, that doesn't need to be the case. Still, we hope users will want to dig in and experiment with the JackAl system. There are plenty of idle memory resources and we left about a dozen pins free, too. I also agree that users should not have to do any coding if they don't want to w/r to a Ver 5 versus earlier boards.
Jack, W8TEE
On Monday, February 11, 2019, 2:33:26 PM EST, ajparent1/KB1GMX <kb1gmx@...> wrote:
Jack,
Refactoring is not a user thing, I never intended that.? That refactor
is on the developers to do and put a version to the public.? ? Also
comments of code efficiency?were for V4.3 Raduino code.? When
I played with it?it was so sluggish it did not keep up with the encoder
well, the code was anything but modular and was a hard to update.
Its purpose (a refactor) is to make suitable space IF NEEDED so the
menu-system (like the calibration menu) can set a bit/byte in the Eeprom
to mark the system as V5 or preV5 and take the specific action.
Properly done by the developers the user should not have to do coding,
it?should be not a big deal to query if the user has V5 or not and
internally configure as needed.
Obviously I should have made clear this is for the base Raduino and the
JackAl, and Nextion user have their own special fun.
Allison
|
