Not sure about delays over USB anymore.
The 'production system' is out of reach, I can't watch the busy indicator.
Espruino WiFi's IO and TX BUFFERMASKS are both 127, which is enough for the response.
From my current understanding of what happens on a server call of getValue(), all these things happen at once (before anything else like setInterval's execution can happen):
parse the command string, execute the command, send the response
Is this correct?
If I created a mini-repl within the TCP connection to do the 'swch.getValue()' call and return the result upon receipt of a magic word, without the LoopBack pipes, the duration of the disturbation might be significantly shorter.
I'm wondering if there is a way to have a function interrupt currently running console code without changing the Espruino src code. I know about the implications of interrupts, still seeing this as a good option if it's possible at all.
Espruino is a JavaScript interpreter for low-power Microcontrollers. This site is both a support community for Espruino and a place to share what you are working on.
Not sure about delays over USB anymore.
The 'production system' is out of reach, I can't watch the busy indicator.
Espruino WiFi's IO and TX BUFFERMASKS are both 127, which is enough for the response.
From my current understanding of what happens on a server call of getValue(), all these things happen at once (before anything else like setInterval's execution can happen):
parse the command string, execute the command, send the response
Is this correct?
If I created a mini-repl within the TCP connection to do the 'swch.getValue()' call and return the result upon receipt of a magic word, without the LoopBack pipes, the duration of the disturbation might be significantly shorter.
I'm wondering if there is a way to have a function interrupt currently running console code without changing the Espruino src code. I know about the implications of interrupts, still seeing this as a good option if it's possible at all.