00:28 <whitequark> DX-MON: i wrote that, and i wrote it that way, iirc, because SVF is written that way

00:28 <whitequark> feel free to change to o/oe, that does in fact make a lot more sense

00:31 <d1b2> <konsgn> Is anyone by any chance working on a miniature hardware version? I would hate to put in redundant effort.

03:11 <d1b2> <DX-MON> ah, fair enough whitequark

14:06 <_whitenotifier> [glasgow] smunaut opened issue #268: iCE40 NVCM programming support - https://git.io/JtBVh

15:02 <mizziga> Hello

15:03 <whitequark> hi mizziga

15:04 <mizziga> Pretty quiet, it seems :-)

23:33 <d1b2> <Chuck> The only thing that sucks worse than debugging one's own I2C code, is debugging someone else's. As I wait for a Glasgow I'm debugging the implementation of i2c on the GreatFET One I have which is not working.

23:33 <d1b2> <Chuck> And I am reminded that everyone has a way of looking at things.

23:34 <cyborg_ar> Chuck: lol

23:34 <cyborg_ar> so true

23:35 <cyborg_ar> i dont know why I2C seems to always be implemented just a bit wrong everywhere. and everyone has a different definition of wrong

23:35 <d1b2> <Chuck> yeah, what is up with that.

23:36 <d1b2> <Chuck> It only has two things it can do. Read or Write. That's it.

23:37 <d1b2> <Chuck> And you wrap them in a "Start" and a "Stop"

23:38 <d1b2> <Chuck> And because the way its written every command is "START write ..." or "START read ..." and after you have done every command you can say "STOP" which gives someone else a chance to use the bus.

23:52 <d1b2> <Chuck> what is missing in this picture :

23:52 <d1b2> <Chuck> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/613461005392936961/805586248881274880/image.png

23:52 <d1b2> <Chuck> if you guessed "START CONDITION" you would be correct.

23:54 <d1b2> <Chuck> sigh

23:56 <d1b2> <Chuck> Maybe I should get a T-shirt "Without START there can be no ACK"

23:56 <d1b2> <Chuck> Enough venting I guess I have to go code up my own damn I2C exerciser.