more Arduino silliness.

TO ALL this is my take on everything.: 

it was a typeo.. should have been RST_2 12

this one is rather small but my code for my sim has hundreds of #defines. 

here is the new file with IDE 2.0.3

//Pin Names
#define RST_1 13
#define RST_2 12
#define CE_1 11
#define CE_2 10
#define CLK_1 9
#define CLK_2 8
#define RD_1 7
#define RD_2 6
#define SCL 3
#define SDA 2
#define txPin 1
#define rxPin 0

//Pin Modes
pinMode(rxPin, INPUT);
pinMode(txPin, OUTPUT);
// Digital Ports
pinMode(RST_1, OUTPUT);
pinMode(RST_2, OUTPUT);
pinMode(CE_1, OUTPUT);
pinMode(CE_2, OUTPUT);
pinMode(CLK_1, OUTPUT);
pinMode(CLK_2, OUTPUT);
pinMode(RD_1, OUTPUT);
pinMode(RD_2, OUTPUT);

here are the first few lines of the .ino file
#include <SoftwareSerial.h>
#include <Wire.h>
// #include "Adafruit_MCP23017.h"
#include "pins.h"
#include "Fuel.LoadSelector.h"
BTW a few things to know ---- 

#define is supported by the language.  it takes no ram space and the pre-processor changes the define name to the defined value. Once you #define it, it a value that can be used anywhere in the code body. 
also ntewinkel the thing that is called 'void setup()' is very nutty. ie prohibition of executable code.  it should have been called init() and most likely have a return! in this chuck of code I must have rs-232 link up before I can continue.  part of the problem is with C++ which this is written in has the most rigid scoping rules. so for shits and giggles, my code base looks like this which fails and bitches about scoping rules of rxPin & txPin and other wonderfulness. :

#include <SoftwareSerial.h>
#include <Wire.h>
#include "pins.h" // remember this is GLOBAL where all of my pins are not the pinMode() 

int init(){} // Now this is where the pinModes() live.
int initSerial(){
int ret= 0;
Serial.begin(9600);
SoftwareSerial(rxPin, txPin); //rx & tx are defined in pins.h
Serial.begin(9600);
while (serial.availbe() > ) {
char buffer = serialread();
if (buffer = 0x0a ) ret = 1;
else ret = -1;
break;}
return( ret ) ; }

AND SO IT GOES.. 

the supper crud about loop() and setup()  are macros see this page and are NOT required. Amen. 

BTW It looks a if my code works when you use the eclipse tools with the AVR tool chain. 

THEREFORE either the definition of pinMode(pin, mode); LIES where pin MUST be a value. which I don't believe THEN  AND I DO BELEIVE the #define is not being substituted at compile time. !!!!!

AFTERMATH I really want to see the "railroad tracks" for this language!!!

Everyone does things differently, if it were me, I would make the code look different. This example is in one file, but of course it should be split up into several files if desired (particularly for large programs).

Here is a main loop:

To see it more clearly, the code above is pasted at the following link because the Code-pasting tool on Verint seems broken: https://controlc.com/0f9abc38

The video showing the guy reducing program space, is a very bad idea unless program space and speed is so tight. He has made the program unreadable, and it will only work on a particular microcontroller. If he used an ARM based microcontroller with the Arduino IDE, he would find his code totally broken because ARM devices do not have that PORTB that AVR chips do. Similarly, all his timings would be broken because he is no longer using the Arduino library functions such as the delay() function.

It's up to the user to decide if they wish to use the Arduino library functions or not, that's the beauty of most programming languages, use whichever libraries you wish, or do it from scratch like he has done. His code size decreased but it got progressively more ugly. How many users would know that with the particular pin register he used, then it toggles the output. That's so specific to that microcontroller. 

I'd be happy for any scrutinization by anyone. There are many ways to improve it, but I think it's fairly simple-to-follow, and a lot clearer than a lot of ugly Arduino code that people sometimes put together. Deleting the setup() and loop(functions) and replacing with main() and init() is something of a personal choice. I don't normally use Arduino IDE and so would write my own main() function, but equally I don't see it as an issue to use the setup() and loop() because that seems a simple way to gently push beginners to at least consider what code needs to run one-time, and what needs to run repeatedly, and separate it out for them, hence why the IDE creates those functions as placeholders.

shabaz , that looks great. I like your organized programming style.

I totally agree on the readability of the code - it's not often we're stuck with the tiniest of chips anymore, so I too will choose readable, debug-able, maintainable, portable code over tiny improvements in speed and space. That's especially important if you ever want to pass that work onto the next programmer - you can't be promoted if you're irreplaceable

You do have one tiny typo in the setup for the input pins, accessing out_pin instead of in_pin

I don't understand what the advantage might be, when using the Arduino IDE, of using main() instead of setup() and loop(). If that's the preference, then maybe the Arduino IDE isn't the right tool to use.

Hi Nico,

Thanks for spotting that! I totally agree with that, if you're using main() anyway, and removing all Arduino library functions, then there's hardly (if any) benefit left using the Arduino IDE.

after you #define varname value there was no need for the next two lines of code and you now officiated the varnames with

const char outpint[ varname, .....]

const char input[ varname, ......] \

and btw here is my testSerial()

int testSerial() {
int retValue = 0;  
/* this function sets up and tests the serial port for communications. 
 * Returns -1 FAILURE or 1 SUCCESS
 * currently I will force return of 1; until I get the Mega working as this processor starts first and must send a 'Line-Feed' Sequence. 
 */
 
Serial.begin(19200);
while(Serial.available() > 0) {
    if ( Serial.read() == 0x0a ) {
      retValue = 1;
      break; }
    else {
      retValue = -1;         
    }}
return retValue; }

also when I include my canned messages

// Messages array
typedef struct messages {
  // displayNumber could be 0: Display_1, 1: Display_2, 2:Both Displays
  int displayNumber;
  char* data[9];} 
  MESSAGES[] = {
  {0, "Init" },
  {1, "Pls Wait"}, 
  {0, "InitComm"},.....}

I get this nutty crud... should work in C

Compilation error: typedef 'MESSAGES' is initialized (use decltype instead)

dont worry about the typedef I solved it a little different.

// Messages array
typedef  struct  {
  // displayNumber could be 0: Display_1, 1: Display_2, 2:Both Displays
  int displayNumber;
  char* data[9];
  } message; 

  message Messages[] = {

It's up to the programmer, I won't always use an array, but generally I try to if possible, because it's less lines of code and (to me) looks neater than a whole list of PinMode (sometimes followed a whole load of digitalWrite messages to set all the outputs initially low or high or whatever). Anything in arrays is more efficient in terms of lines of code usually. The arrays are a tiny amount of Flash space, compared to a lot of pinMode() function calls.

Great, glad it's sorted!

(I know it's resolved, but just in case anyone is wondering how such types of problems can be identified)

One way is with the IDE. I have CLion installed, and it immediately identifies the issue as the user types the code. It puts a red squiggle underneath the text, and hovering over it provides the information. Other IDEs may do it too, but the default Arduino IDE tends to wait until compilation, to let the compiler figure it out. Productivity is increased a lot when the IDE is examining everything as it is typed.

(I know it's resolved, but just in case anyone is wondering how such types of problems can be identified)

One way is with the IDE. I have CLion installed, and it immediately identifies the issue as the user types the code. It puts a red squiggle underneath the text, and hovering over it provides the information. Other IDEs may do it too, but the default Arduino IDE tends to wait until compilation, to let the compiler figure it out. Productivity is increased a lot when the IDE is examining everything as it is typed.

yes I thought it work but I fixed it with this:

/ Messages array
typedef  struct  {
  // displayNumber could be 0: Display_1, 1: Display_2, 2:Both Displays
  int displayNumber;
  char* data[9];
  } message; 
  
  message Messages[] = {
  {0, "Init" },
  {1, "Pls Wait"}, 
  {0, "InitComm"},