No it's ok, not that big of a deal, However, Just to be clear, are you then saying
that i need to include "ticks" in delay or... what ?
I was taught the way to use delay is
You have the instruction "delay" and you have the parenthesis and inside of them you place your argument which is time "in ms" , that's how i was taught.
Now you are saying we need to put ticks in there, is that it.
But if 1 tick - 1ms , Let's even say there is a conversation happening, we would still be putting in the same value wouldn't we ?
Not at all. I'm saying if you look at that macro, you'll see how a number of ms is converted to an equivalent number of Ticks. That is the question under discussion, isn't it? Spoiler Alert: it's 1:1.
Do we trust ChatGPT ???
You seem to, I haven't had much exposure to it , my understanding is that we can use to write the basics of code but not for anything meaningful.
Personal, i don't really want to take advice from an A.I. that i have not verified that gives accurate information.
Now as to what was actually said..
Yes, i know this, it's the basic and smallest unit that the scheduler uses.
Hold on.. so are we saying that A TICK, IS NOT... A FIXED RATE but instead variable ?
That's interesting , or is the A.I. Wrong ?
I thought the reason for a RTOS is to make your project "event" based and that task priorities are
assigned to tasks based on how quickly you want a task to react to an event.
OK, I've read it and i put it in as a precaution since i didn't want to have a stupid problem like it crashing and the reason being after 30mins of debugging that i didn't put in a simple delay.
thats' why i put it in,
Now that i know my code works, we can feel free to take it out and play around with it
Mine 3-LED sketch/Fig-1 of post #10 is now at running condition on my ESP32 and I clearly observe that they are being served on round robin time sharing basis which is only effective if the participating tasks have equal priority levels. In the referred sketch Task10 and Task11 have been initialized at priority level 1.
Well.. Sort of ..
Yes i do want to make it event based.
as for Priorities, My understanding of setting priorities was to organize what task goes first and second and so on as opposed to how quick they react to an event, although that would also be useful
Why would you need an RTOS if you just wanted to run functions in some order. All you would
have to do is call function1 first then call function 2 next then ...
OK, but we're gonna learn that aren't we,
and besides, that's why your'e here isn't it , to keep all us "Blind folk" on the straight an narrow so that a car doesn't hit us while crossing the road
Ok so how do you suggest i proceed to gain a better understanding of Inter-task synchronization
"Mastering the FreeRTOS Real Time Kernel" document is replete with examples. I'd suggest taking some of those, fleshing them out, and customizing them to the particular flavor of FreeRTOS in the ESP32. For assistance, post your attempts and any problem encountered.
