On 3/2/17 12:34 PM, Mats Wichmann wrote: > On 03/02/2017 09:33 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote: >> Em quarta-feira, 1 de mar?o de 2017, ?s 23:02:49 PST, Christian Gran >> escreveu: >>> Hi, >>> >>> tried to find working Arduino code - but couldn?t. Neither in iotivity nor >>> in iotivity-constrained. >> >> Right, it isn't in constrained because, like I said, there is no one who is >> serious about making a device and is prototyping with Arduino. So there >> hasn't >> been motivation. >> >> On the main implementation, just search for ARDUINO (all capitals) and >> you'll >> see #ifdef and #ifndef all over the place. > > > From the viewpoint of a relative outsider, scattering support for a > platform (especially a "minor" one, by which I mean something specific > like Arduino rather than generic target like "windows" or "linux") all > over the codebase seems a Bad Idea anyway. Is it possible to eventually > refactor so that kind of work can happen in a "ports" tree, at which > point you can then keep a distinction between "officially supported" and > "contrib" targets?
That does seem like a best practice in this kind of situation. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://filament.com/
