Emil Fresk

Okey, reopening

The issue with cfg support is that the order of attribute evaluation in rust is undefined, this causes large problems with the analysis because we cannot know which is active....

IMO this is a much cleaner entry point for peripherals. If you'd like to, please create an RFC even if it has been a lot of time since this issue...

This also gives the idea of a starting "world context" that can be moved, split, and passed around. Stealing a bit of RTFM syntax would yield: ```rust #[entry(device = my_pac_crate)]...

The simple way to do it is to have one "binary" crate and one "firmware" crate. In the firmware crate you can have testing and everything as normal as this...

This is a good way, but if you do want to use the `.cargo/config` file so `cargo build` uses the embedded target directly it can become annoying. I have a...

When the following PR is merged: https://github.com/FluenTech/embedded-time/pull/122 The following will work: ```rust #[task(local = [ts])] fn foo(ctx: foo::Context) { if monotonics::now() - *ctx.local.ts >= 1000.milliseconds() { defmt::info!("go"); *ctx.local.ts = monotonics::now();...

+1 on @therealprof for me. The zeroing does not convince me, though ergonomics is indeed a good plus.

Was this RFC accepted or not? Churning out the implementation for this should go fast.

I needed to brush up my proc macro knowledge, so I made a simple impl to do the expansion and type signature checking: https://github.com/rust-embedded/cortex-m-rt/tree/uninit_impl