Dom Rodriguez
Dom Rodriguez
Hm, that approach sounds sound. Has there been any more progress on the `build-std` aspect of things recently? I took a step back with my bootloader months ago, but now...
Thanks. It doesn't pass tests quite yet when you use `core2` in the macro, I haven't committed those. Should have mentioned it. It still needs work.
Some feedback now would be good. The problem with adding `core2` in the macro is that it breaks all tests. I suspect I'm doing it wrong.
Yeah, the main issues are: - `byteorder` - `proc-macro-hack`. The former in my tests can have `no_std` support, and that compiles fine. It's `proc-macro-hack` that is the issue. I think...
Work so far: https://github.com/Cosmo-CoDiOS/structure/tree/no-std-support
Latter could work, example of `Cargo.toml`: ``` [features] std = [] ``` So, we'd have no_std by default, and std as opt-in. Breaking change, sure, but it's the approach I've...
Oh, yeah - my crates do it the way I outlined, as by default they should run on `no_std`, and when running on the Cosmo Communicator aarch64 chip, it then...
Added. It's part of a wider project, but I think I've limited your access scope to only the fork.
OK, so I've managed to swap out `raw::c_void` to use the `cty` crate. I've also switched the `String` import to use `core`'s, I'll create some conditionals soon. Main issue now...
@birkenfeld My proposal is that we split the tasks between us, work on separate branches for each task, then merge into one branch, and I/you can submit a PR against...