Fixed error on first measurement + added averaging parameter #15
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I have multiple concerns about the correctness and CPU usage of this change. Sorry, no time right now to write a lengthy explanation. |
|
But briefly, if the issue is merely incorrect output on the 1st measurement, that should be handled in the non-interrupt read() function. Burdening the CPU critical interrupt code with so many extra condition tests isn't the way. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This code fixes
Error on first measurement was because it needs a first interrupt to stamp the first capture. Hence in this code on the first capture, we only compute previous_capture.
An averaging parameter with a default value of 1 is passed to begin().
Was tested on Atmega328p . I could not test teensy, since I don't have one.