Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 1:32 pm
Inspired by this thread, I have been thinking over the "correct" way to render signals of this type ... (...)+ several times. I would like to stress out that this is a real issue, to determine the correct behavior when e.g. a program is sent the instruction "send the signal one time". It is not an academic question like "keypress shorter than 6ms" or debouncing circuitry.
The pronto notation is normally described as "intro part exactly once, repetition part if and as long as the button is held down". I.e., zero or more times. Therfore, I think I stand to my interopretation that the IRP
should properly be rendered as having intro sequence I R, which is what IrpMaster presently does.However, in a sense, this is clearly ugly, awkward, and redundant. If I recall properly, there is a flag in LIRC called something like "send_repeat_least_once", which should be exacly what we need.
Returning from this philosophical excursion, I implemented a new option, tentatively called, which will make IrpMaster render the intro sequence without repetition part, also in the ... (...)+ case. Example (connecting to the above mentioned thread)
The latter form is obviously what mdavej expects.
I would welcome feedback of all sorts. Should it be default? Is there a less awkward name? I plan to incorporate it into the next release, due later this spring.
The pronto notation is normally described as "intro part exactly once, repetition part if and as long as the button is held down". I.e., zero or more times. Therfore, I think I stand to my interopretation that the IRP
Code: Select all
I (R)+Returning from this philosophical excursion, I implemented a new option, tentatively called
Code: Select all
--disregard-repeat-minsCode: Select all
[1191]$ java -jar dist/IrpMaster.jar -c data/IrpProtocols.ini -p dish_network 0 0 4
Device Code: 0.0 Function: 4
0000 0048 0012 0011 0017 015A 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 005C 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 015A 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 005C 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 015A
[1192]$ java -jar dist/IrpMaster.jar -c data/IrpProtocols.ini -p --disregard-repeat-mins dish_network 0 0 4
Device Code: 0.0 Function: 4
0000 0048 0001 0011 0017 015A 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 005C 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 00A1 0017 015A
I would welcome feedback of all sorts. Should it be default? Is there a less awkward name? I plan to incorporate it into the next release, due later this spring.