BLEduino - Gone for Good?

http://forum.bleduino.cc/

I can't find any responses to questions asked in the forum.  There seems 
to be no way to buy these.  The only sign of life is that there are 
posts that people got the boards they paid for through kick starter.

You wouldn't think they would let this die.  It seems worthwhile and 
potentially profitable.

This sort of device is perfect for a prototype I am building.  I haven't 
found any others like it, MCU married to the bluetooth function.

Also, anyone know if bluetooth can be peer to peer or if it is like USB 
in that one end has to be master and the other slave?  I'm talking about 
hardware.  If the only difference between the two ends is software it 
doesn't matter to me.  I just want to have two MCUs talking over a 
virtual serial port connection.

I found RFduino and that seems to be right up the alley.  Some of the 
documentation is a bit odd though.  They show code examples of 
*functions* which appear to be used like a variable.

RFduinoBLE.send() is a function.  Here is their example.

RFduinoBLE.send = (myarray, 5); //Sends a character array called myarray 
with a length of 5

Is this something in C that I missed?  Or maybe they aren't using C?

-- 

Rick

rickman wrote:
> http://forum.bleduino.cc/
>
> I can't find any responses to questions asked in the forum.  There seems
> to be no way to buy these.  The only sign of life is that there are
> posts that people got the boards they paid for through kick starter.
>
> You wouldn't think they would let this die.  It seems worthwhile and
> potentially profitable.
>
> This sort of device is perfect for a prototype I am building.  I haven't
> found any others like it, MCU married to the bluetooth function.
>
> Also, anyone know if bluetooth can be peer to peer or if it is like USB
> in that one end has to be master and the other slave?  I'm talking about
> hardware.


https://learn.sparkfun.com/tutorials/bluetooth-basics/how-bluetooth-works

There are heresies where the piconets are more sophisticated
than a designated master.

> If the only difference between the two ends is software it
> doesn't matter to me.  I just want to have two MCUs talking over a
> virtual serial port connection.
>

That should be easy. This link is just an example; haven't
tried these particular units.

https://gridconnect.com/bluetooth-to-serial.html?gdftrk=gdfV25227_a_7c1592_a_7c9893_a_7c738

I recall these kind of things being sort of unreliable. Didn't spend 
much time on it; it didn't "work" and we went back to cables.

> I found RFduino and that seems to be right up the alley.  Some of the
> documentation is a bit odd though.  They show code examples of
> *functions* which appear to be used like a variable.
>
> RFduinoBLE.send() is a function.  Here is their example.
>
> RFduinoBLE.send = (myarray, 5); //Sends a character array called myarray
> with a length of 5
>

That's not 'C'.

> Is this something in C that I missed?  Or maybe they aren't using C?
>


You can have "callback" in a struct in 'C'.

typedef struct {
      int (*compar)(const void *, const void*)
} mySortinAh;

int x(const void *a,const void *b)
{
....
    return 0;
}

...

mySortinAh.compar = x;

qsort(...,mySortinAh.compar...);


I didn't even try to compile that; there may be some whinging from the 
compiler you'll need to address.

-- 
Les Cargill

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>  They show code examples of 
> *functions* which appear to be used like a variable.
> 
> RFduinoBLE.send() is a function.  Here is their example.
> 
> RFduinoBLE.send = (myarray, 5); //Sends a character array called myarray 
> with a length of 5
> 
> Is this something in C that I missed?  Or maybe they aren't using C?
> 
> -- 
> 
> Rick
> 

The Arduino environment is a subset of C++; "send()" is a method
 of the class RFdunioBLE.  That being said, using assignment to
 actually do something like send the array in this
 line:

RFduinoBLE.send = (myarray, 5);

is a rather obtuse use of the language - I'm not sure exactly how
 they're implementing that but I wouldn't do it that way. 
 Functions are overloadable in C++, you just need to define
 multiple methods in the class with the same name and different
 arguments and the compiler will figure it out, so you could have
 one "send" method for single characters, one for arrays,
 etc.

-- 


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 2/28/2015 6:44 PM, bitrex wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>>   They show code examples of
>> *functions* which appear to be used like a variable.
>>
>> RFduinoBLE.send() is a function.  Here is their example.
>>
>> RFduinoBLE.send = (myarray, 5); //Sends a character array called myarray
>> with a length of 5
>>
>> Is this something in C that I missed?  Or maybe they aren't using C?
>>
>> --
>>
>> Rick
>>
>
> The Arduino environment is a subset of C++; "send()" is a method
>   of the class RFdunioBLE.  That being said, using assignment to
>   actually do something like send the array in this
>   line:
>
> RFduinoBLE.send = (myarray, 5);
>
> is a rather obtuse use of the language - I'm not sure exactly how
>   they're implementing that but I wouldn't do it that way.
>   Functions are overloadable in C++, you just need to define
>   multiple methods in the class with the same name and different
>   arguments and the compiler will figure it out, so you could have
>   one "send" method for single characters, one for arrays,
>   etc.

Thanks.  The other thing I have asked them about is that they use the 
Arduino environment for programming their modules, but they use an ARM 
processor.  I thought Arduinos were all ARMs, no?  Is the actual 
compiler a separate part of the overall package?

-- 

Rick

On 2/28/2015 4:47 PM, rickman wrote:
> I thought Arduinos were all ARMs, no?

WOW, talk about wishful thinking !!

> Is the actual compiler a separate part of the overall package?

Yes

A simple google search would have prevented you from making a 
stupid^H^H^H^H^Hilly statement.

On 2/28/2015 8:08 PM, hamilton wrote:
> On 2/28/2015 4:47 PM, rickman wrote:
>> I thought Arduinos were all ARMs, no?
>
> WOW, talk about wishful thinking !!

Sorry, I meant AVRs.


 >> Is the actual compiler a separate part of the overall package?
 >
 > Yes
 >
 > A simple google search would have prevented you from making a
 > stupid^H^H^H^H^Hilly statement.

No, there is nothing to prevent stupid statements.... lol   It was a 
typo...  Now, do you have anything useful to say?

-- 

Rick

On 02/27/2015 21:42, rickman wrote:
> This sort of device is perfect for a prototype I am building.  I haven't
> found any others like it, MCU married to the bluetooth function.

You haven't?
How about the Blend Micro?
http://redbearlab.com/blendmicro/
-- 
Torfinn Ingolfsen,
Norway

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> Thanks.  The other thing I have asked them about is that they use the
> Arduino environment for programming their modules, but they use an ARM
> processor.  I thought Arduinos were all ARMs, no?  Is the actual
> compiler a separate part of the overall package?

Arduinos were traditionally AVR8's but now there are some ARM models.

One of the Arduino easy-for-newbies features was they were programmed
with something called sketches, a graphical tool or DSL for embedded
controllers.  I'm not sure exactly how it worked (I never used it) but
it apparently produced C code, that then wiggled the CPU's control wires
by calling a certain API that the toolkit supplied.

So when boards like the Arduino claim Arduino capability, I think it
means they ship a library that implements that C-callable API, so you
can use the Sketch tool to produce C programs which you then compile
with a C compiler for that board's CPU.  It doesn't mean you can move
binaries from AVR arduinos to the ARM boards.

Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes:
> So when boards like the Arduino claim Arduino capability,

Too early, need coffee :)

The above was supposed to say: when boards like the RFDuino claim
Arduino compatibility...

On 3/1/2015 12:15 PM, Torfinn Ingolfsen wrote:
> On 02/27/2015 21:42, rickman wrote:
>> This sort of device is perfect for a prototype I am building.  I haven't
>> found any others like it, MCU married to the bluetooth function.
>
> You haven't?
> How about the Blend Micro?
> http://redbearlab.com/blendmicro/

"Blend Micro runs as BLE peripheral role only"

Thanks for the link, but I need units to talk to each other.

-- 

Rick