Closed JJJollyjim closed 4 years ago
Whoops, looks like I'm running into a rustfmt bug in CI: https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/issues/3819
Have refactored to avoid parameter attributes, should pass CI this time :)
Awesome! Putting all the nRF5x support in one crate is definitely the way to go, especially now that I've looked at the nRF5340 (it's again pretty much the same radio).
I've got the beacon example is working, though I am yet to try the other one (I don't have a pin for UART exposed on the device I'm testing on...).
Technically you don't need to see the output just to try it, and all the debug printing might be too much for a 16 MHz Cortex-M0 anyways. Unfortunately there's currently a bug that means that the link layer doesn't work with logging compiled out (#94), this might also apply to the nRF51 (or might not).
Will take a closer look at this later. Thanks a lot for the PR!
This is an updated version of #59 against the lastest master, and with the code refactored into a single crate, since it turns out there are very few differences between the implementations!
To end up with clear naming without breaking backwards compatibility, I renamed
rubble-nrf52
torubble-nrf5x
, and maderubble-nrf52
a shim crate that re-exports all of rubble-nrf5x - I'm happy to rethink this approach if you would prefer something else.The nrf51 build is tested in CI, though I have not added demos yet (the
nrf51
crate doesn't provide amemory.x
(I'm planning to change this)).I've got the beacon example is working, though I am yet to try the other one (I don't have a pin for UART exposed on the device I'm testing on...).