feat: rework CrossPointSettings#510
Open
borisfaure wants to merge 1 commit intocrosspoint-reader:masterfrom
Open
feat: rework CrossPointSettings#510borisfaure wants to merge 1 commit intocrosspoint-reader:masterfrom
borisfaure wants to merge 1 commit intocrosspoint-reader:masterfrom
Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
This fixes #487 |
Contributor
|
Contributor
What does it mean? |
Contributor
What descriptions changed exactly? |
borisfaure
force-pushed
the
feat/rework-settings-data-structure
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d16fda2 to
3e516a9
Compare
Contributor
Author
No description changed. The settings labels are in the same file as their declarations. |
borisfaure
force-pushed
the
feat/rework-settings-data-structure
branch
from
3e516a9 to
329c897
Compare
Contributor
|
Maybe make settings (de)serialization autogenerated in a way protobuf does? For example: uint8_t sleepScreen = DARK; // = 1
uint8_t sleepScreenCoverMode = FIT; // = 2
// settings:reserved uint8_t = 3
uint8_t statusBar = FULL; // = 4And make a script that generate |
Contributor
Author
I agree the whole serialization/deserialization can be greatly improved but should be done in a further PR. |
borisfaure
force-pushed
the
feat/rework-settings-data-structure
branch
from
329c897 to
89aa47e
Compare
borisfaure
force-pushed
the
feat/rework-settings-data-structure
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d1769e6 to
4ee4b26
Compare
Multiple goals are achieved with this change: - make descriptions of settings close to their definitions - settings validation on loading with reset to default in case of bad value - do not boot-loop on bad string values - (de)serialization is based on a single list of descriptors: single point of truth - possibly to have default values for the String configuration type - more constexpr to reduce RAM usage - less hardcoded values - more maintainable RAM Usage: From RAM: [=== ] 32.5% (used 106516 bytes from 327680 bytes) Flash: [========= ] 94.9% (used 6217240 bytes from 6553600 bytes) To RAM: [=== ] 32.3% (used 105844 bytes from 327680 bytes) Flash: [========= ] 94.8% (used 6213378 bytes from 6553600 bytes) Boot config validation with a test where the status bar config is wrong: [1256] [SD] SD card detected [1256] [CPS] Loading settings from file [1265] [CPS] Invalid value (0x3) for Status Bar, resetting to default [1265] [CPS] Settings loaded from file
borisfaure
force-pushed
the
feat/rework-settings-data-structure
branch
from
4ee4b26 to
5ae10a7
Compare
Member
|
I've moved forward with #920, however there are some nice small improvements in this PR which we can still merge if you're happy to rebase on top of master |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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.
Summary
Multiple goals are achieved with this change:
constexprto reduce RAM usageRAM Usage:
From
To
Boot config validation:
AI Usage
While CrossPoint doesn't have restrictions on AI tools in contributing, please be transparent about their usage as it
helps set the right context for reviewers.
Did you use AI tools to help write this code? PARTIALLY