Hi there!
I did some tests with the RTOS and want to use it for future projects. But I don't like, that all initial stuff (like creating threads and timers) is done in the constructor.
I prefer global static instances of e.g. Serial PC(USBTX, USBRX); DigitalOut led1(LED1); char rxBuffer[512]; ... So the compiler can calculate the needed RAM far better. See "Program Details" -> "Build" -> "Memory usage". Why not doing the same with the RTOS classes?
Some days ago I moved the "osTimerCreate" call from RtosTimer constructor to RtosTimer::start and this works. No additional method call is expected from the user.Then did a pull-request, so the official mbed-rtos can publish that change. But nothing happened :(
The Thread class has no start method, but I'd like to have one. So even this class can be instanciated global, but started dynamically.
What do you think about?
Hi there!
I did some tests with the RTOS and want to use it for future projects. But I don't like, that all initial stuff (like creating threads and timers) is done in the constructor.
I prefer global static instances of e.g. Serial PC(USBTX, USBRX); DigitalOut led1(LED1); char rxBuffer[512]; ... So the compiler can calculate the needed RAM far better. See "Program Details" -> "Build" -> "Memory usage". Why not doing the same with the RTOS classes?
Some days ago I moved the "osTimerCreate" call from RtosTimer constructor to RtosTimer::start and this works. No additional method call is expected from the user.Then did a pull-request, so the official mbed-rtos can publish that change. But nothing happened :(
The Thread class has no start method, but I'd like to have one. So even this class can be instanciated global, but started dynamically.
What do you think about?