On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 1:14 AM Sebastian Huber <
sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote:
> On 23/01/2021 23:44, Chris Johns wrote:
>
> > On 23/1/21 12:19 am, Gedare Bloom wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 5:55 AM Andrew Butterfield
> >> mailto:andrew.butterfi...@scss.tcd.ie>>
> wrote:
> >>
On 23/01/2021 23:44, Chris Johns wrote:
On 23/1/21 12:19 am, Gedare Bloom wrote:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 5:55 AM Andrew Butterfield
mailto:andrew.butterfi...@scss.tcd.ie>> wrote:
Hi Sebastian,
I'd prefer 2.
The directive may be called from an interrupt context
(substit
On 23/1/21 12:19 am, Gedare Bloom wrote:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 5:55 AM Andrew Butterfield
> mailto:andrew.butterfi...@scss.tcd.ie>>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> I'd prefer 2.
>
> The directive may be called from an interrupt context
>
> (substituting "must", "must not",
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 5:55 AM Andrew Butterfield <
andrew.butterfi...@scss.tcd.ie> wrote:
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> I'd prefer 2.
>
> The directive may be called from an interrupt context
>
> (substituting "must", "must not", as appropriate)
>
>
Yes, I agree. (Use of "in" is ambiguous here, because
Hi Sebastian,
I'd prefer 2.
The directive may be called from an interrupt context
(substituting "must", "must not", as appropriate)
Regards, Andrew
> On 22 Jan 2021, at 12:09, Sebastian Huber
> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> since there is an agreement to add a CONSTRAINTS section to the directiv
