> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:14:23 +0400
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] No hal pin LED PATCH for 2.5
>
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 01:58:11AM +0000, Chris Morley wrote:
> > The reason for an integer rather then bool is in the future to facilitate
> > setting the pin as an in or as an out.
> > Or I could add two bools on for 'without HAL' one for in or out pin.
> > Same reason for the name pintype rather then without HAL
> If you insist on output pin functionality it's still independent to input hal
> pin.
> So having two bools - one for input other for output still would be better.
> Integer
> values are hard to understand and explain.
I will rewrite it as Bool then then add another bool later if output
functionality is wanted,
>
> > I can see a use to having a HAL pin that follows an LED that is set
> > programically
> > rather then having to have a program set a HAL pin and an LED.
> You may connect led to that pin. It may require some 'net' commands in your
> hal files
> but keep things more simple - LED will be still indicator.
>
> Pavel
I would not want to rely on having a HAL net command to have an indicator work.
the LED to follow the program status is important, whether the user connects
that to
a HAL signal to control something is up to them. Either way the LED still
indicates
and there is less programming to worry about.
Thanks Chris M
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Mar 27 - Feb 2
Save $400 by Jan. 27
Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2
_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
