This repository was archived by the owner on Sep 6, 2023. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 220
esp/modesp.c: Add osdebug() and oslog() #112
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wouldn't it be better to have this function just take 1 arg, esp.osdebug(level), same as esp8266, and just have level=None mean disable, and any other value is an integer that is passed as the second arg to esp_log_level_set?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In the case of the ESP32 it doesn't really allow you to redirect errors to different UARTs (?) so I'd say it's fine to repurpose the single argument to this function to be the log level.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe? You're the maintainer, so get the final say.
The reasoning for the additional parameter is twofold: that repurposing the existing argument would break backwards compatibility for anyone migrating code from ESP8266 in a minor but unpredictable way; the other is that although I can't see how to do it yet, the ESP32 does have two UARTs, and the hardware allows developers to change pin assignments for how UARTs are routed... it may be that at some point this would become possible.
But would appreciate your thoughts.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, points taken. But I think the implementation should be adjusted so that passing
None
as the first arg always disables logging, even if there are 2 args passed (egesp.osdebug(None, 123)
).