Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Hide Info,State,Instance #2856

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 23, 2024
Merged

Hide Info,State,Instance #2856

merged 3 commits into from
Dec 23, 2024

Conversation

bjoernQ
Copy link
Contributor

@bjoernQ bjoernQ commented Dec 20, 2024

Thank you for your contribution!

We appreciate the time and effort you've put into this pull request.
To help us review it efficiently, please ensure you've gone through the following checklist:

Submission Checklist 📝

  • I have updated existing examples or added new ones (if applicable).
  • I have used cargo xtask fmt-packages command to ensure that all changed code is formatted correctly.
  • My changes were added to the CHANGELOG.md in the proper section.
  • I have added necessary changes to user code to the Migration Guide.
  • My changes are in accordance to the esp-rs API guidelines

Extra:

Pull Request Details 📖

Description

Closes #2766 but not fully #2697 (besides hiding AlternateFunction - posted an open question there)

Additionally it marks gpio/etm, gpio/lp_io, gpio/rtc_io, gpio/etm, RtcPin, RtcFunction, WakeEvent, RtcPinWithResistors , AnalogPin, TouchPin as unstable.

TouchPin is feature gated by #[cfg(touch)]

No CHANGELOG.md entry (can add it if we want it - seems unnecessary since one of the main things to mention for the next release is the introduction of the unstable feature)

Testing

n.a. / builds passing
inspect the generated docs

@bjoernQ bjoernQ added the skip-changelog No changelog modification needed label Dec 20, 2024
@bjoernQ bjoernQ marked this pull request as draft December 20, 2024 16:41
@bjoernQ bjoernQ marked this pull request as ready for review December 23, 2024 09:51
Copy link
Member

@MabezDev MabezDev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

@MabezDev MabezDev added this pull request to the merge queue Dec 23, 2024
Merged via the queue into esp-rs:main with commit 36095e4 Dec 23, 2024
44 checks passed
@@ -86,11 +86,19 @@ mod placeholder;
pub use placeholder::NoPin;

#[cfg(soc_etm)]
pub mod etm;
crate::unstable_module! {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Did these really need separate macro calls?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the way the macro currently works - yes

I don't see a way to make the macro work here without turning it into a proc-macro (and I'm not sure it's worth it)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What do you mean, what's wrong with this?

crate::unstable_module! {
    #[cfg(soc_etm)]
    pub mod etm;

    #[cfg(lp_io)]
    pub mod lp_io;

    #[cfg(all(rtc_io, not(esp32)))]
    pub mod rtc_io;
}

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

mhhh - I remember it was causing some problem with the lp_gpio macro before but now it's working this way - so we can change to one macro invocation again

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
skip-changelog No changelog modification needed
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Private details should not leak into the public API
3 participants