I’d prefer to see a more vendor-neutral GPS class so I would avoid using “fez” in the name of the project.
mfgps or microgpsframework or something.
Oh and I’m in - I was about to sit down and start working on this myself but why re-invent the wheel?
I agree with not adding FEZ to the project’s name. NETMF is not only limited to FEZ.
The thing is though, we’re all GHI users, if we say its supported on all netmf devices then we’ll have to test it on all netmf devices. By supporting just GHI we make sure the driver is as good as possible. If people want to use it off the FEZ then they can go ahead, however it may not be compatible.
FEZ was never really suppose to refer to the device brand, just to the phrase 
Mark - I also plan on using this on my Netduino in addition to my Fez. So I, personally, want it product-neutral.
Mark has a good point there… :think:
@ Robert everyone posting here may be a GHI product user but there’s a lot of us who are ALSO Netduino users and if behooves us to make everything universal. Not that it should be a problem since it’s .netMF and for GPS I can’t think of anything that would be FEZ specific but we should approach it as a platform independent class base.
Just checked in my changes. I haven’t been able to test it yet as it’s getting pretty late at night.
Chris - add me please to the project - codeplex is “gregoberfield”. Danke.
Sie wurden hinzugefügt, Greg.
I am also a standards nazi; but I propose that we have under scores in local (within methods) variable names. and IF is fields that they should be camel case. I’ll can attach our Corp C# code standard to the project so ppl will know up front.
Oh as for the refactoring: Totally dude refactor away. Yea I’m not so godd on the seplling.
We might need a conference bridge to have code conversations from time to time. I propose skype
Greg has access to a conf call bridge. W can probably use that. Works 1000x better than Skype
Sweet!
By the way, I went ahead and published the project. We are now coding under the Apache 2.0 license. If someone wants that to be changed, let me know.
kurtnelle, underscores inside methods just looks messy, and there is no need for it. The IDE can tell you if it’s local just by clicking on it (highlights all references to it) and my mouse over-ing the tooltip tells you it’s scope.
There are whole books on this, but basically: [b][url]Microsoft Learn: Build skills that open doors in your career
No unscores in methods. Different words need to be separated by way of CammelCase .
Chris, he wants underscores on variables within a method scope.
eg:
int a()
{
int _i;
_i++;
return _i;
}
Ah, my skim reading again :
Yeah, no underscores on method scope variables.
I had a quick look at the code out on codeplex.com and was wandering if this code in NmeaGps.cs
while (sentence[sentencePos] != '*' && sentence[sentencePos] != '\r' && sentence[sentencePos] != '\n')
{
sentence[sentencePos++] = (char)buffer[seekPos++];
}
if (sentence[sentencePos] == '*')
{
checksum[0] = (char)buffer[seekPos++];
checksum[1] = (char)buffer[seekPos++];
}
Could be replaced by this code?
string[] checksum = sentence.Split('*');
if (checksum.Length == 2)
{
.....