Sebastien Lelong wrote:
>> Now I'm about to update pinmap.py I see 2 methods of saying 'no alias'
>> in pinmap.py:
>> 1. do not mention the pin at all
>> 2. mention the pin, but only with its own name as alias
>> The first is probably the most efficient, but the second shows that the
>> pin is not (accidently) forgotten.
>> I think we should use only one method, and nevertheless the argument
>> above I would prefer the first. What's your opinion?
>
>
> I prefer option 1 too. Pins can't be accidentally forgotten, a whole PIC
> can. (but pins can be wrong...)
OK, I'll skip (/remove) pins without any alias.
I'll change the dev2jal script such that it gives 1 (just 1) warning
when a whole PIC is missing. Currently the script generates far to many
warnings one for each pin without alias!
Regards, Rob.
--
Rob Hamerling, Vianen, NL (http://www.robh.nl/)
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jallib" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
