One wire support

I thought one wire protocol is not a thing anymore https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1-Wire

A customer was just asking about it so let me so you insiders, should we consider adding one wire to TinyCLR 2.0? Do you use it?

1 Like

since 1wire very very small ,i belive it should need to be included.

Never used it, doubt I ever will

I use it with my students. I think it should be added

Several years ago (brain rumbling) worked on communicating with SDI-12 devices.
I think such is still in use…AFAIK.

IMO: NO… reason for 1-wire.!
Just do your best at RS-232 & ethernet.
In short KISS.

If one needs 1-wire, get a RS-232 (or ethernet) converter or build such into production device.
If one needs RS-422/RS-485, get a RS-232 (or ethernet) converter or build such into production device.

None of such is difficult to build in hardware or software.
Really, RS-232 is the root of all communications…all others evolved from such.
Assume earlier, there was something even more primitive.

Again, KISS…GHI should work in the deep dark world to make things possible and not work to make ALL things possible.

I’ve got a big DS18B20 chain around the house from ages ago (actually the reason I bought my Fez Domino, in circa 2006/7?) so yeah, I would like to see it if possible. But not at the expense of any other real IoT capabilities; a bunch of replacement temp sensors is easy in preference to rock solid networking and security

I think what I am hearing is “nice to have but we will live without it”.

My answer is “add if not at the expense of other features at low priority”

2 Likes

Nice to have as a library option, doesn’t have to be part of the OS itself.

1-wire temp devices are handy but they are slow in comparison to using I2C, although 1-wire does allow much longer cables.

Much better for IoT is the 1-wire iButtons that can be used to authenticate users. We have used them before with a telematics system where the driver has a key with an iButton that is used to validate him as the driver for that vehicle. Of course, the driver can give this to anyone but then he has to explain why his driving style or locations where invalid and the resultant loss of his job for doing so. :slight_smile:

1 Like

I’d 1006% agree with the “add-able library module”. Consider it a good example case for writing it in the RLP-esque way :slight_smile:

but RLP is disabled on 2.0(security reason)

Why is RLP a security issue?

https://forums.ghielectronics.com/t/whos-working-on-what/22560/6 (it was @Gus_Issa answer)

I knew that Gus had said it was a security issue, but he never said why.

Because you are now accessing the entire system with no restrictions and we do not know what a user might end up doing. There is an MPU (Memory Protection Unit) on the system that we plan to take advantage of.

Also, this is a 480Mhz system with plenty of native helpers. It would be interesting to see how far we can push C# before a user needs to dig into C++. Ideally, you should not need to leave C# :nerd_face:

1 Like

except onewire is all about the timing not the speed :wink:

well I guess Dat has done the deed in TinyCLR 1, has it made it here too in 2.0?