Return pipe number after executing whatHappened() #6
Conversation
This file contains 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
…ready. Useful when using interrupts to keep interrupt function short. See data sheet page 59 of the nRF24L01+ for an explanation.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Hi maniacbug,
I'm using your RF24, RF24Network and FreeRTOS libraries together with interrupts for the RF24. To keep interrupt routines short, I modified
whatHappened()to return the pipe number for which data is available. This way, a modifiedRF24Network::update()does not have to poll all pipes for data in a separate task, but theRF24Network::update()routine can be executed directly. Of course, the return value ofwhatHappened()is only valid (and of use) whentx_readyis true.Please review my change. Hopefully it could be of use!
Kind regards,
BasilFX