Albin Hedman
Albin Hedman
There appears a bunch of unrelated changes. Since this PR is quite large, would it be possible to keep this PR to only the e-hal 1.0 migration? :) Also the...
@techmccat I have rebased this and made an attempt at fixing https://github.com/stm32-rs/stm32g4xx-hal/pull/129#discussion_r1697442683 in #172 . I will close this in favor of #172 please reopen if you disagree. Thanks a...
Tested by running `cargo test --features stm32g474,defmt,cordic --tests -- --chip stm32g474RETx` on a [NUCLEO-G474RE](https://www.st.com/en/evaluation-tools/nucleo-g474re.html#overview) and currently passes all tests
Tested again after rebase
Yay! I do not have anything right now. I (or @Wratox) will hopefully start working with the H5 in a couple of weeks. Since it is quite new there might...
I am not quite sure if this is worth it. As you say there is quite a complexity trade of, going from zero to two dependencies, more complex bounds etc...
@gwen-lg do you have any thoughts? Personally making it optional behind a feature flag feels a lot better. Still keeping it quite simple and with zero deps for those who...
Let me know if you want me to remove the last commit
> The tests you added look good, but they don't seem relevant to the methods you touched. I think they belong in a separate PR. Done in #31 > I...
Have you had the opportunity to test this?