|
I thought I was going to get in front of my graphics device drivers by starting with the SSD1306 - a small monochrome OLED display that comes in 3 different sizes/resolutions and runs over SPI, I2C, or (not usually) parallel - the latter of which is basically never available for MCUs - it's either SPI or I2C
It's a simple device. I thought implementing it would be the easiest place to start.
Now keep in mind, I've written this graphics library such that it should seamlessly interface with my device drivers with very little massaging on my part. I've architected it such that I can just lego what is there together with my device drivers.
Or so I thought.
This device has an integrated frame buffer, but you can't *read* the frame buffer over either of those serial interfaces - only the parallel one you never have access to. This isn't a show stopper normally, except it's a monochrome framebuffer, meaning 1-bit per pixel, meaning you have to read 8 pixels in order to write one pixel because you can only write a byte at a time.
So basically, you can't really do random access to the frame buffer at all with this device because of the above.
I had counted on not being able to read the buffer, but I hadn't counted on not being able to do random access when writing the frame buffer. That was a corner I just didn't think around.
Software architecture was being discussed earlier, and I spent some time as a software architect professionally.
What it taught me was no matter how good at it you are, the results are mixed, not consistent no matter how process oriented you are about it. The reason is because of things like the above. We can't predict the future. We can't think around every corner.
Architecture comes with a certain amount of accepting the idea of moving 3 steps forward and two steps back when it comes to design.
There are ways to mitigate this. You can be flexible and code compartmentalized such that if you rewrite part of it you don't have to rewrite all of it.
I saved myself because I use "template polymorphism" instead of standard polymorphism and inheritance in my library, so I don't have a bunch of base class changes to make that will wreck my entire source tree, but it comes with downsides as well.
But you will be rewriting code for any non-trivial project. You will be redesigning bits as you go. Your best efforts are not put in heading all of that off but rather putting it into making your code flexible enough that it will survive having portions of it ripped out and completely rewritten.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: What it taught me was no matter how good at it you are, the results are mixed, not consistent no matter how process oriented you are about it. The reason is because of things like the above. We can't predict the future. We can't think around every corner.
Amen !
I see a paradoxical inverse relationship between the extent to which i may have become secure and confident in my technical abilities ... and ... the extent to which I could enter a state of FUD facing a new project/challenge ... and ... the unleashing of creativity, and out-of-the-box thinking. Of course, I don't mean self-confidence in the broader sense: I speak of FUD that hones the blade of reason 
At the same time, creative "exaltation," as you have novel insights, carries the risk so perfectly embodied in the Narcissus story.
I was lucky that my professional work usually gave me complete freedom to do "architect" whatever, because no one else understood my specialties (the PostScript language, color science, printing).
These daze, I would never claim to have been an "architect" in the profound way I believe Marc Clifton is !
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't so much claim the role as it was thrust upon me. In fact, I didn't want to go that direction, but I had been a senior developer for so long, headhunters were wondering about me. I had to move at least laterally if not upward, whether I wanted to or not in order to stay commercially viable.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I'm certain you deserve the title 
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't like doing it, so I'm sure there are others more suited. I am good at systems. I love systems. But politics, not so much, and I found that being an architect involves more interfacing with people I didn't care to interface with than I really liked.
I'm a coder. Give me code. I like design, but I like to do it on my own, or among a small team I lead, where I don't have to deal with politics. Otherwise, I'd prefer to be strictly a coder.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Thank your hubby. You impossible to please.
honey the codewitch wrote: I saved myself because I use "template polymorphism" instead of standard polymorphism and inheritance in my library
Case closed.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, it has its drawbacks, like it's possible to put source code that won't compile into production if you do things this way. Code coverage testing becomes much more ... fun.
It can also lead to code bloat, which is one of the main reasons that will cause me to fall back on binary polymorphism.
There is no single silver bullet. I wish there was.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Wow.
I was not talking code.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't see the hubby part. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
[...]
Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
How good are you in searching for generality can never beat the 'clever tricks' of the 'creative people' designing those little devices. 
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
I wish it was a clever trick. That I could at least understand. Frankly, it was either laziness or otherwise expediency in the name of cost savings that made them work this way. There's no technological reason for it other than .. less than stellar design.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: expediency in the name of cost savings
Managers name that 'clever trick'.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
Hahaha that's fair.
And why I'm glad I'm not in management.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
When I saw this[^] I new that once more I've a confirmation that there's no cure for stupid.
Opinions may differ on health issues and such - but this, in my opinion, is taking political allegiance to a specific topic even past CULT level.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos, GHB wrote: is taking political allegiance to a specific topic even past CULT level.
Is there a political group that says you should not get vaccinated? 
|
|
|
|
|
There are two types of politics: party politics and advocacy. In reality, the border's often rather vague but I'm only thinking in terms of advocacy.
Here, the final paragraph, speaks those 'volume's' in just a few words:
Quote: The school has a chiropractor on staff to give adjustments to students and staff and practices meditation among students with the use of crystals.
I'd postulate that any sign of illness is mitigated with the sacrifice of a suitable number of chickens.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos, GHB wrote: with the use of crystals
I know a lady, wonderful person, who practices crystal therapy on her clients. They keep coming back and love the work she does. Which leaves me gobsmacked because I am a sceptic and think she is as crazy as a bedbug (she agrees with me).
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity -
RAH
I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP
|
|
|
|
|
It's hard to underestimate the placebo effect. Whatever she is doing, her clients clearly believe its working, and it appears to be helping. Hopefully, though, she knows the limits and will direct her clients to qualified professionals when the situation warrants.
Keep Calm and Carry On
|
|
|
|
|
The funny thing is she IS a highly qualified professional nurse with decades of experience. One of the smartest people I know, still nuts though.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity -
RAH
I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP
|
|
|
|
|
Placebo.. and also an "health practitioner" (or quack, as it is) that listen to you..
|
|
|
|
|
Remember - the placebo effect canbe about 30% effective.
Convolute into that that her clients are believer to begin with for going to such therapy. There's also the need for attention she give them - possibly for illnesses that others in medical professions of a less esoteric nature tell them (perhaps politely) that it's all in their head.
PT Barnum famously figured out how to make a buck from this part of human nature.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos, GHB wrote: meditation among students with the use of crystals
How ridiculous! Do they need a specific clock frequency to meditate? Do they get hot if they meditate too hard and the clock frequency is too high? Do they have a static or a dynamic architecture? If it's dynamic, their minds will be completely cleared in less than a millisecond at a clock of 0 Hz. You don't need a crystal for that! And if it's static, then not even 0 Hz (or any other frequency) will make any difference.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
CodeWraith wrote: If it's dynamic, their minds will be completely cleared in less than a millisecond at a clock of 0 Hz.
You are making the unwarranted assumption that there was anything in their minds to begin with. 
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Irrelevant. They are cleared, independent of what was in there before. Resistance is futile.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
