<jotthyr[m]>
and doesn't have any effect in led connected to PB10
<jotthyr[m]>
Anyone could tell me in which direction I should "move"?
<jotthyr[m]>
🫏
haobogu[m] has quit [Quit: Idle timeout reached: 172800s]
cesnel[m] has quit [Quit: Idle timeout reached: 172800s]
fooker has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
fooker has joined #rust-embedded
ni has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
PhilMarkgraf[m] has joined #rust-embedded
<PhilMarkgraf[m]>
I am in the process of changing my system's debug reporting from rprintln to defmt. One wants types that #[derive(Format)] and the other wants types with #[derive(defmt::Format)]```. Are these derives conceptually mutually exclusive? Meaning you really only want one. -- Not that they are actually mutually exclusive... you can have both. But would you typically WANT both?
<PhilMarkgraf[m]>
* I am in the process of changing my system's debug reporting from rprintln to defmt. One wants types that #[derive(Format)] and the other wants types with #[derive(defmt::Format)]. Are these derives conceptually mutually exclusive? Meaning you really only want one. -- Not that they are actually mutually exclusive... you can have both. But would you typically WANT both?
<PhilMarkgraf[m]>
* I am in the process of changing my system's debug reporting from `rprintln` to `defmt`. One wants types that `#[derive(Format)]` and the other wants types with `#[derive(defmt::Format)]`.
<PhilMarkgraf[m]>
Are these derives conceptually mutually exclusive? Meaning you really only want one. -- Not that they are actually mutually exclusive... you can have both. But would you typically WANT both?
<cr1901>
(I'd like to thank RobertJrdens, without whose permission this was made possible)
<diondokter[m]>
<PhilMarkgraf[m]> "I am in the process of changing..." <- > <@shakencodes:matrix.org> I am in the process of changing my system's debug reporting from `rprintln` to `defmt`. One wants types that `#[derive(Format)]` and the other wants types with `#[derive(defmt::Format)]`.... (full message at <https://catircservices.org/_matrix/media/v3/download/catircservices.org/kXGrQjaZoZtuEnkMfWxNFJqy>)
<cr1901>
what's the difference between defmt and rprintln?
firefrommoonligh has quit [Quit: Idle timeout reached: 172800s]
<diondokter[m]>
cr1901: rprintln formats the text on your device. Defmt stands for deferred formatting and does the formatting on your PC.
<diondokter[m]>
Saves data and most importantly reduces flash size a ton
ni has joined #rust-embedded
<PhilMarkgraf[m]>
<diondokter[m]> "> <@shakencodes:matrix.org> I am..." <- > <@diondokter:matrix.org> Are you getting a compile error?
<PhilMarkgraf[m]>
> Because these are both the same
<PhilMarkgraf[m]>
I meant #[derive(Debug)] for rprintln. Sorry about that confusion. -- And I have problems where an Error type from a driver needs defmt::Format derived.
<diondokter[m]>
Ah clear. You can have both that's fine
<diondokter[m]>
The only reason to remove the derive debug is to get a little bit better compile time.
<diondokter[m]>
Other than that it has no impact on the code
<PhilMarkgraf[m]>
I am looking at adding #[cfg_attr(feature = "defmt", derive(defmt::Format))] to the Error type in the driver. And I am wondering whether I should also change the #[derive(Debug)] to #[cfg_attr(not(feature = "defmt"), derive(Debug))]
<diondokter[m]>
I'd keep it simple and just add the defmt Format derive
<PhilMarkgraf[m]>
Thank you for the input, Dion! I hope you are having fun at the convention!
<diondokter[m]>
Yes, I have! And three more days to go haha
ragarnoy[m] has joined #rust-embedded
<ragarnoy[m]>
Hey, does anyone have any recommendation for a crate that provides tools to listen on a serial port ? I'm going to use the serial crate but it's not maintained anymore so I'm wondering if there's a more up to date alternative
<ragarnoy[m]>
* date alternative. The goal is to have a minicom equivalent to redirect the content to a TUI application