Teemo Vaas

@noisymime thanks for the comments. Today I managed to reorganize things so that I got rid of the small helper functions, and also got rid of the need for using...

@noisymime no problem. I hope I did not ruin the PR with the latest addition of structs with virtual functions. I researched into it and it still seems good solution...

> @TBAMax I may have a way to remove the virtual function calls. Is this PR still being actively worked on? @adbancroft Bring on the info about alternative ways! Currently...

> @TBAMax I'm working on a patch for you. Question: the new fuel scheduler adds a new check when setting the next*Compare members: there has to be 400 timer ticks...

Just a note here that recently merged changes from #876 probably affect this too, because ignition or fuel timer macros are changed there. So when rewriting this at some future...

> @TBAMax Teemo - I agree with this approach to the timers and the need to recode against latest master. What can I do to help? > > A different...

> @TBAMax I fixed the unit tests with the PR I submitted to your main branch: [TBAMax#11](https://github.com/TBAMax/speeduino/pull/11) @adbancroft Ok, thanks for re linking that in again and drawing attention to...

Also conversation about that and some history of development is in the issue #778 .

@VitorBoss good question actually. I went for the standard millis() timing just for simplicity reasons. Otherwise when trying to use the timer flags with this scheme there would need to...

Ok, now I think it is ready.