Merge TARGET_LPC11CXX and TARGET_LPC11XX?

[omdathetkan]

It looks like the HAL implementation for the LPC11XX and the LPC11CXX are virtually the same, except for:

• a few extra I/O pins on the LPC11XX
• the extra can peripheral on the LPC11CXX
• reserved memory for on chip drivers on the LPC11CXX (0x1000 0050 - 0x1000 00B8)

I noticed that a lot of bugs already got fixed on the LPC11XX leaving both directories out of sync. Would it make sense to use one target folder and just use a few ifdefs for the minor differences?

[emilmont]

Yes, it sounds like a reasonable idea.

We will consider doing it once we have both targets in our official test bed.

Cheers,
Emilio

[matthewelse]

Hi Emilio,

I was just wondering what your plans were for setting up a test bed for the
LPC11(C)XX?

On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Emilio Monti notifications@github.comwrote:

Yes, it sounds like a reasonable idea.

We will consider doing it once we have both targets in our official test
bed.

Cheers,
Emilio

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/65#issuecomment-24524263
.

Matthew Else

[emilmont]

Hi Matthew,
no clear plans yet.

It is not yet among our supported platforms: http://mbed.org/platforms/

Cheers,
Emilio

[emilmont]

Fixed by a4badc7 and 30907d7

[mbednotifications]

Perfect!! Thanks a lot

On Friday, September 27, 2013 1:29:14 AM UTC-7, Bogdan Marinescu wrote:

Fixed by a4badc7a4badc7dd2db480f49202d8eb12f42d0d65eedf7and
30907d730907d7

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/65#issuecomment-25230166
.