Well,it is not silly for the examples to have this check since like arg001 said, different biards could use all the pins differently. Also the Pico itself - a programmer could redesign what pins do what in software. But yes, if you have a standard Pico hardware and config. then no check needed.The case we were pondering was a case in which a user was starting with a new/"fresh" Pico board... I'm not sure your reasoning applies here.Not so silly. The intended use with the SDK is that you define a board file that defines all your pin usage; a board that uses all the pins for other purposes may not declare any for I2C.
Yeah - that is hard to imagine - for sure... perhaps even silly.![:)]( "Smile")
The Pico examples have top-level makefiles to build the whole lot in one go. A user might well want to go "let's build all of the pico-examples for my new board". So it's important for the pico examples to tolerate the I2C pins being undefined rather than stop with an error.
Statistics: Posted by breaker — Wed Feb 07, 2024 1:36 am