Emmanuel Blot
Emmanuel Blot
Sorry I misread the code. I need to check it does not break the `bus:address` code though
Maybe it is time to break compatibility with index-based syntax, (re-)using your proposed syntax: URL scheme: ftdi://[vendor[:product[:serial]]]/interface URL scheme: ftdi://[vendor[:product[:bus:address]]]/interface URL scheme: ftdi://[vendor[:product[::@index]]]/interface ?
Ok, as `index` is not really reliable anyway - and that the new `bus:address` syntax is a far better way to refer to S/N-less devices, I think it is worth...
I'm ok with that. I think I will remove the index support for now...
I think I never run FTDI SPI as such as low clock speed, so maybe the timeout should be increased with such low-extreme clock rate, yes. The timeout is there...
Unfortunately, no. I never encountered this need up to now. Could you describe a typical use case?
Ok, I got it. It would be a nice addition indeed... I wonder what would be the best (& easy) way to test/debug this. Any idea?
Sorry, I have no idea on how the Windows USB stack works (except that is a gigantic pile of sh*t). The best place to ask the question would be the...
Yeap, EEPROM support is mostly broken. Patches accepted.
Hi, I know this is a very old PR and that I've not been working on PyFTDI for nearly two years... I did give a quick try to this new...