Hi Martin,
thanks for your feedback.
Am 12.07.2016 um 14:28 schrieb Martin:
Hi Perter, all,
> this approach prohibits to use both devices simultaneously.
I think this is a blocking issue for merging akin device drivers.
IMHO If this situation happens the drivers should be separated back,
even if bloating/doubling the code.
> For similar CPUs we maintain a "common" folder ...
Considering the mentioned "blocking issue" I would go for a "common"
folder for solely collecting utility functions, i.e. functions not
using global/static variables or buffers.
> Another solution would be to handle common and individual functions
in one file (without #ifdef). ...
You mean putting all required functions in each driver without
considering similarities?
That approach is about to maintain one folder/file for a shared
implementation. That file consists of individual functions *and* shared
functions. That prohibits from bloating the file structure and enables
simultaneous usage but enlarges code size..
At least this would be safe, since every driver then truly operates in
defined bounds.
But obviously this would most probably introduce a lot
developing/debugging repetition.
Best regards,
Martin
Best
Peter
Am 07/12/2016 um 10:49 AM schrieb Peter Kietzmann:
Hi devs,
on several occasions the question about how to merge similar device
drivers occurred. That means covering different derivatives of a
device with one device driver, to avoid code duplication. Compare
discussions in these PRs:
https://github.com/RIOT-OS/RIOT/pull/5604
https://github.com/RIOT-OS/RIOT/pull/5484
https://github.com/RIOT-OS/RIOT/pull/5433
For the dht11/22 or at86rf212b/232/233 we already merged drivers by
putting #ifdef around different code parts. This does not affect code
readability as long as differences are small (which is not
guaranteed). On the other hand, this approach prohibits to use both
devices simultaneously. Furthermore, naming schemes might get
confusing. E.g. merging "MPU6000", "MPU6050" and "MPU9150" might lead
to "MPUXXX0". I've no idea about further and future version names.
For similar CPUs we maintain a "common" folder next to the dedicated
CPU version. Different code parts were maintained separately in
individual folders. The question is, if this approach is reasonable
for pretty simple device drivers where multiple derivatives might exist.
Another solution would be to handle common and individual functions in
one file (without #ifdef). This might bloat code size but allows usage
of different versions in parallel. Also, it does not bloat the file
structure. The problem about naming schemes is still present here.
I'd like to have a general principle for this. What is your opinion
about the above described procedures? Are there other/better ideas?
Best
Peter
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@riot-os.org
https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
--
Peter Kietzmann
Hamburg University of Applied Sciences
Dept. Informatik, Internet Technologies Group
Berliner Tor 7, 20099 Hamburg, Germany
Fon: +49-40-42875-8426
Web: http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@riot-os.org
https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
