Antti Keränen

Oh, I see. At least your fork has some more visibility if this PR is not going to get merged.

Nice to hear! Thanks for the effort. +1 for the idea of a config file for key bindings.

I'm having similar issue with SVD's in http://www.st.com/resource/en/svd/stm32l0_svd.zip ``` $ svd2rust -i STM32L0x3.svd tree.get_child("mpuPresent")', /checkout/src/libcore/option.rs:839:4 ```

Would using #27 and #28 fix this issue as well? Then it would be the user's responsibility to handle a thread that checks the value and could terminate the whole...

If I recall correctly this branch worked okay last time I checked but I lack the courage to publish this as a new version because this is a widely used...

Code reviews for this are highly appreciated to get this moving forward.

This is unfortunate. I don't know how to avoid this other than changing the handling of SIGTERM out from a feature and use a separate handler instead. Any ideas?

I would guess actix does something funky here. I am not sure how well this crate works in async context. If you can provide a full example with actix in...

Thanks for the info. I agree this would be a good thing to do.

I do like both of these proposals (`Channel` and `Counter`). :+1: