philj404 / simpleserialshell Goto Github PK

For example, if commands "setroute" and "setrouteremote" are both registered (with documentation) the wrong function will be executed under certain circumstances. This defect was introduced by @brucemack during the work on the help feature. Fix will follow.

Hello, nice shell library!

I have a problem. When I try to run an minimum example on EpoxyDuino. I do not see anything on the screen.

#include <Arduino.h>
#include <SimpleSerialShell.h>

#if defined(UNIX_HOST_DUINO)
#  ifndef ARDUINO
#  define ARDUINO 100
#  endif
#endif

int helloWorld(int argc, char **argv) {
    int a = argc;
    int b = (int)(long)argv;

    Serial.println("hello world");
    return a+b;
};


void setup(){
    ::delay(1000); // wait for stability on some boards to prevent garbage Serial
    Serial.begin(115200); // ESP8266 default of 74880 not supported on Linux
    while (!Serial); // for the Arduino Leonardo/Micro only

    shell.attach(Serial);

    shell.addCommand(F("sayHello"),helloWorld);
}
void loop(){

    shell.executeIfInput();
}

I can insert keys and delete them with keyboard, but If I press Enter, nothing happens.

Thanks for making such a great library. Incredibly useful. Especially because you have both Serial attachment and a more manual shell.execute(line); features.

There's only one feature that I think would be really useful, and that's the ability to register a comment character like "#", that means a line is skipped over immediately without a command not found message being outputted.

I've uploaded AdjustableBlink on my arduino.
this message appears at first:

and then nothing happens when i send "setTogglePeriod" commands

Would it be reasonable to add the ability to define a prompt string that would be displayed whenever the shell was waiting for user input? I would typically install something like "> " or "$ ".

Why? Two reasons:

1. It makes the shell a bit more user-friendly, since it lets the user know when the system is ready to accept input (as opposed to still crunching on the previous command). This pattern is used by the standard UNIX shells.
2. Makes it easier to write a parser for serial automation of a device that uses the shell. The prompt would serve as a delimiter that indicates that the output of the previous command is finished and that a new command can be sent. This would be helpful for high-level system tests where a device is being controlled via its serial port.

I'll submit a PR for this if the idea is acceptable, but I want to check this first.