Always use nfc_initiator_transceive_bytes(). If you where using advanced
features and already relying on nfc_initiator_transceive_bytes(), then your
code has to be updated to unset the NDO_EASY_FRAMING option. See an example of
such a change in the libfreefare's repository:
http://code.google.com/p/nfc-tools/source/detail?r=566
Updates issue 106
Status: Feedback
Romuald: I am not sure about the option enum values. I took 0x02 thinking it
would not hurt but am not really sure about that because I can see many 'holes'
in the sequence.
While here, rename the pn53x_transceive_callback() function to
pn53x_transceive_check_ack_frame_callback() to make it more obvious what it is
supposed to do.
- Define two sets of DE<FOOBAR> macros: the first one for 'generic' errors
which could be encountered regardless of the NFC device the library is acting
with (0xX000), and ont set for device-dependant errors (0x0X00).
- Make some more functions accept a nfc_device_t* as first argument to have
access to the iLastError;
- Reset errors when entering public API functions;
- Save errors when applicable;
- Distinguish system-level errors (e.g. I/O error) and operational errors (the
PCD returns an unexpected value);
- Minor tweaks.
Update issue 65
Status: Feedback
New review:
Owner: rconty@il4p.fr
Cc: rtartiere@il4p.fr
Summary: Review the error-handling code.
Branch: /branches/libnfc-error-handling
For this development, a strong emphasis has been set on making changes that
will not go through our way on the way to libnfc-1.6+. For this reason, some
constructs are not natural (e.g. error codes defined in two different places),
please keep this in mind when reviewing.
Or maybe I would rather have removed the const and called strdup(3)?
New issue
Summary: Sync code and comments
Owner: rconty@il4p.fr
Status: New
Romuald, can you please review this changeset and fix the code if I corrected
the wrong way (i.e. the comment was Okay and the code bogus while I fixed the
comment thinking the cod was right).
Thanks!
New issue
Summary: Make sending ACK on message transmission skipable.
Owner: rtartiere@il4p.fr
Cc: rtartiere@il4p.fr
Status: New
I guess that for performance reasons, some advance users would prefer to skip
sending the non-mandatory ACK on data transmission. They may also perform a
quicker check of the ACK returned by the chip after sending the command and
before receiving the response (not sure about this one).
It will probably be a ./configure option disabled by default that allows some "shortcuts" to perform NFC hacking.
