Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [paho-dev] Contributing and coding standards?


that sounds great!

A question, for my information.  If you are working with Linux, what is your reason for using the embedded client rather than the 'mainline' C project?  The Linux interfaces were meant to be an example, but I thought that this project would be most useful for embedded OSes, hence the name.

I always envisaged the embedded C client project as a toolkit, where the lower level interface layers would be customised to suit the underlying platform.  That we might get contributions for these different platform layers.  I guess what I should do is write some doc (programming guide, etc) to explain that.

On 14/11/18 03:43, Daniel Santos wrote:
Hello Ian, thank you for the response!

On 11/13/2018 05:48 AM, Ian Craggs wrote:
Hi Daniel,

that's great news!  I'm just about to start looking at the embedded C
project again, with the immediate goal of finished off the MQTT V5
support.  I'd also like to complete the threaded async version that I
intended to write years ago.  (And proper example integration with at
least one TLS library).
Oooh, MQTT5 :)  In my case I'm going to be doing everything in a single
thread with selects and/or polls.  I guess I'm kind-of in the camp of
having synchronization implemented in a way that it can be "compiled
out" or even swapped out (perhaps via C++ template parameter?)  Either way.

I'm not familiar with FreeRTS, Arduino or CC3200 and it's probably safe
to assume that support for many other OSes, architectures and OS-less
chips/boards will be desired by somebody at some point.  While I don't
want to go overboard trying to design the perfect scheme to mesh with
them all, I would at least like to be close.

I can write up the coding standards I've followed.  What's wrong with
tabs = 2 spaces? :-)  If we did use tabs, then you could set the
indent to whatever you like when you look at it :-)

For each item you want to address, perhaps the best way to discuss is
to open an issue, describe the problem and your plan, and then we, and
any other interested party can add their comments.
This makes the most sense as there are a lot of dimensions here.

One observation I have, is that I intended the project to be easily
portable across operating systems and environments.  The risk of
concentrating on one OS is that portability is lost, or hidden away.
I'd just like to be sure that isn't lost.

Yes, precisely.  Thank you!


Ian Craggs
Eclipse Paho Project Lead; Committer on Eclipse Mosquitto
Tech Lead in IBM Watson IoT Platform

Back to the top