Rockbox mail archive

• Next message: langhaarrocker: "Re: Rockbox 2.0 Feature Freeze"
• Previous message: Uwe Freese: "Re: Some more questions on writing Rockbox code"
• In reply to: Holger Lembke: "RE: Rockbox 2.0 Feature Freeze"
• Next in thread: Björn Stenberg: "Re: Rockbox 2.0 Feature Freeze"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Holger Lembke wrote:
> So they don't bounce?

They bounce, yes. Debouncing is done by only accepting keys that are
pressed in two consecutive polls.

> Not looking too much into the future and not knowing most of the details
> within the jukebox hardware (especially, how two simultanously pressed keys
> are generated), I would switch to a simple counting scheme, like on a
> standard keyboard.

I think you need to convince us *why* this is better.

> It would only need about 4 bits (5 bit for the future?) to count the
> maximum numbers of buttons imaginable in the near future. The remaining 4
> bits could be status bits like 'comming from remote', 'BUTTON_REPEAT' and
> 'BUTTON_REL'.

How is this better than the current scheme?

> And a word (the same way it is today) could hold two button presses, so the
> two-buttons-pressed-the-same-time could be handled that way...

Why?

> I hope you know what will happen if Archos shipps a Rockbox on the next CD
> release...

Yeah. More people will want more features, and we will continue to
develop the features we like, on our spare time, in our hobby project.

/Linus

• Next message: langhaarrocker: "Re: Rockbox 2.0 Feature Freeze"
• Previous message: Uwe Freese: "Re: Some more questions on writing Rockbox code"
• In reply to: Holger Lembke: "RE: Rockbox 2.0 Feature Freeze"
• Next in thread: Björn Stenberg: "Re: Rockbox 2.0 Feature Freeze"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]