Assert ordering of pins in bi_pins_with_names is correct #1791
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Huhhh. Rather than break the "external API", I guess a better approach might be to reorder the names so that they're in the same order as the pins? Put perhaps the usage of macros instead of functions means that you can't do that? 🤔 |
|
Oh yeah, that's a nicer idea - I think that's possible with macros, so I'll try that |
|
#1858 used instead |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #878 by adding an assertion that the ordering of pins in bi_pins_with_names is correct
The pins are passed as a pin mask, so there is no ordering, and therefore the pins must be given in ascending order else the names will be associated with the wrong pins
This breaks compilation of the pio/spi/spi_flash example, as the pins there are not in order - given the default pins could be in any order depending on the board, that example should probably be modified to have 4 separate
bi_1pin_with_namelines instead of a singlebi_4pins_with_names