Makefile generalisation, Unicode support #3
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Hi,
Here are some tweaks to firmata_test so it builds on Unicode wx2.8 builds, and also some changes to the Makefile so it's easier to override specific parameters (and also not rely on hard-coded wx-config paths).
I made these before I noticed the comments in #1 to the effect that this repo isn't canonical, and is just synced from pjrc.com periodically... I also hadn't noticed the "OSL" Unicode tarball on pjrc.com, which makes some of these same changes as well... Oops, my mistake going direct to github(!)
I think there are now 4 slightly divergent versions of the firmata_test code:
I have a bit of a bold proposal, apologies for popping up out of the blue and making this:
@PaulStoffregen, how would you feel about making firmata/firmata_test the canonical repo for firmata_test and working from here? The Unicode changes in this PR should be fully ANSI-compatible, so building the same code against ANSI wxwidgets 2.x should work. The Makefile changes should also be backwards compatible, I kept the hardcoded wx-config paths and just added a fallback to $PATH if they aren't found (this is untested on Windows, though).
If that isn't desirable, I think a good second best would be to mark this repo clearly as "non-canonical/unsupported/out-of-date" on the description and README and link to the same tarballs as firmata.org, so it's clear which version is canonical. I can submit a PR for this if that helps.
However I would prefer the first proposal, if Paul doesn't mind. It'd be nice to have a common place to find (and contribute to) this helpful code. :)
Thanks everyone for your work on firmata and this test tool, btw.