Propsal to restructure sample files

[rob...@hotmail.com]

Hello,

This is posted both on the Jallib as well as the Jallist Google Group.

Matt and I had a short discussion about the directory structure of Jallib, related to sample files.

At this moment all sample files are in the 'sample' directory. At this moment these are almost 3000 files, most of them blink samples.

In order to find samples more easily we could organize this differently. Below some proposals.

Proposal 0:
----------
Keep it as it is.

Proposal 1:
----------
sample/blink  <-- For all blink samples
sample/other  <-- For all other samples

Propsal 2:
----------
sample/blink  <-- For all blink samples
sample/jal    <-- For all jal samples (e.g. print, large_array, etc.)
sample/device <-- For all samples of device files

Propsal 3:
----------
sample/blink   <-- For all blink samples
sample/jal     <-- For all jal samples (e.g. print, large_array, etc.)
sample/ssd1306 <-- For all samples of the ssd_1306 device, one directory per device
sample/ws2812b <-- For all samples of the ws2812b device, one directory per device
....           <-- You do get a lot of directories, 1 for each device.

Proposal 4:
-----------
sample/blink    <-- For all blink samples
sample/16f1823  <-- For all 16f1823 samples
sample/18f46q83 <-- For all 18f46q83samples
....            <-- You do get a lot of directories, 1 for each PIC type for which there are samples
 
My preference is proposal 1 with the second proposal 2 where proposal 1 is the easiest to implement since blink samples are already in a separate directory on GitHub.

Can you let me know your thoughts about it?

Thanks.

Kind regards,

Rob

[pinhe...@gmail.com]

Hi Rob,

That's a very good idea !

My preference goes to proposal 2, but if it takes too much time and effort to implement, proposal 1 would already be nice.

However, in case of proposal 1, I would prefer the two folders to be at the "root" of the jal files (at the level of the existing "samples" folder), and named as "blink" and "samples".    By doing so, we avoid adding one level of folders.  Only the blink examples ate moved from the "samples" folder to their own dedicated folder.

Have a nice weekend 

David 

Obtenir BlueMail pour mobile

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallist" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jallist+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jallist/8b0683ec-5e5f-424d-9d89-81650eabb430n%40googlegroups.com.

[Hans van Veldhuizen]

Hi Rob,

The remark from David is great for me.

regards

Hans

Op zaterdag 18 oktober 2025 om 12:22:30 UTC+2 schreef pinhe...@gmail.com:

[Rob CJ]

Hi David, 

Thanks for the suggestion. That is also a good option and easy to implement so:

jallib/blink

jallib/compiler

jallib/doc

jallib/lib

jallib/sample

Works for me and if it works for others too we could change this.

Kind regards,

Rob

---

Van: jal...@googlegroups.com <jal...@googlegroups.com> namens Hans van Veldhuizen <hanz...@zeelandnet.nl>
Verzonden: zaterdag 18 oktober 2025 12:58
Aan: jallist <jal...@googlegroups.com>
Onderwerp: Re: [jallist] Propsal to restructure sample files

 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jallist/80a50ec4-eed4-468d-b009-74a950613901n%40googlegroups.com.

[vasi vasi]

I prefer the proposal 3 as 4 is not productive. 

When I want an example, I don't look for the microcontroller because that migh have an example or not... Instead, I am looking in examples after the peripheral or the actuator or the LCD/LED matrix that I intend to use, and only then I look inside to see if there is my micro. If not, then I look for a close match-up, but in the end, I am only interested to see in which sequence those functions are used and I start from there.  Somehow, this proposal nr. 3 follows the same categorization that exists already in the github for libraries - well, maybe the user is not accustomed to this, as the final package differs in structure, but it should be.  

But you know what? I won't vote. I will delegate the maintainer for this, he is doing all the heavy lifting. Thank you! 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jallist/AM7PR02MB6098B066D9DF9A3C23F2F66AE6F7A%40AM7PR02MB6098.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com.

--

Vasi

[vasi vasi]

BTW, the proposal nr. 3 can also go away with only a handful of examples for each actuator/sensor/etc., no need to create an example for all of micros, is enough to use only representatives for the existing families and in the end is much less work to do. My two cents.

--

Vasi

[FraserSmith51]

Agree with this. No way do we need examples for every pic but with modern families just one per family should be enough.

[vasi vasi]

I've seen in many similar projects, there in a separate repository for the examples. That should simplify the generating scripts for both repositories. And I think that the example repository can go away without the need of generating scripts. Only blink samples require to stay in the main repo.  

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jallist/28456b1c-cba2-4dcd-94ea-d300411aca81n%40googlegroups.com.

--

Vasi