Skip to content

WiFi.begin "aligned with Arduino.cc". blocking (breaking change) #9063

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

WiFi.begin "aligned with Arduino.cc". blocking (breaking change) #9063

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

JAndrassy
Copy link
Contributor

change WiFi.begin to blocking to be "aligned with Arduino.cc".

PR adds beginTimeout property used in begin with waitForConnectResult

with beginTimeout 0 begin is async.
default beginTimeout is a minute as in waitForConnectResult

@JAndrassy
WiFi.begin "aligned with Arduino.cc". blocking
ee6ca23 
beginTimeout property used in begin with waitForConnectResult

with beginTimeout 0 begin is async. default beginTimeot is a minute
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jan 3, 2024

Warnings
⚠️

Some issues found for the commit messages in this PR:

  • the commit message "WiFi.begin "aligned with Arduino.cc". blocking":
    • summary looks empty
    • type/action looks empty

Please fix these commit messages - here are some basic tips:

  • follow Conventional Commits style
  • correct format of commit message should be: <type/action>(<scope/component>): <summary>, for example fix(esp32): Fixed startup timeout issue
  • allowed types are: change,ci,docs,feat,fix,refactor,remove,revert,test
  • sufficiently descriptive message summary should be between 20 to 72 characters and start with upper case letter
  • avoid Jira references in commit messages (unavailable/irrelevant for our customers)

TIP: Install pre-commit hooks and run this check when committing (uses the Conventional Precommit Linter).

👋 Hello JAndrassy, we appreciate your contribution to this project!

Click to see more instructions ...


This automated output is generated by the PR linter DangerJS, which checks if your Pull Request meets the project's requirements and helps you fix potential issues.

DangerJS is triggered with each push event to a Pull Request and modify the contents of this comment.

Please consider the following:
- Danger mainly focuses on the PR structure and formatting and can't understand the meaning behind your code or changes.
- Danger is not a substitute for human code reviews; it's still important to request a code review from your colleagues.
- Resolve all warnings (⚠️ ) before requesting a review from human reviewers - they will appreciate it.
- To manually retry these Danger checks, please navigate to the Actions tab and re-run last Danger workflow.

Review and merge process you can expect ...


We do welcome contributions in the form of bug reports, feature requests and pull requests.

1. An internal issue has been created for the PR, we assign it to the relevant engineer.
2. They review the PR and either approve it or ask you for changes or clarifications.
3. Once the GitHub PR is approved we do the final review, collect approvals from core owners and make sure all the automated tests are passing.
- At this point we may do some adjustments to the proposed change, or extend it by adding tests or documentation.
4. If the change is approved and passes the tests it is merged into the default branch.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against ee6ca23

@me-no-dev
Copy link
Member

I do not agree with this. Not to mention how many projects will be unnecessarily broken by such change. Why cater to the 0.01% of people who might be still using the old and outdated WiFi shields?

@JAndrassy
Copy link
Contributor Author

JAndrassy commented Jan 4, 2024 •
edited
Loading

I agree, but there was something about desire to be aligned with Arduino.cc: #8930 (comment)

@me-no-dev
Copy link
Member

Only if it makes sense and will not otherwise cause issues. Changing the behavior in such drastic way on something that has been used for a decade at this point, especially something as critical as WiFi.begin(), should not be done. Maybe if you make the default timeout to be 0, then we could add it. Will not break anything and will also allow for blocking calls, if one so desires.

TD-er
TD-er reviewed Jan 4, 2024
View reviewed changes
libraries/WiFi/src/WiFiSTA.h
protected:
static bool _useStaticIp;
static bool _autoReconnect;
static wifi_auth_mode_t _minSecurity;
static wifi_scan_method_t _scanMethod;
static wifi_sort_method_t _sortMethod;
unsigned long beginTimeout = 60000;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

1 minute timeout is absolutely unusable.
10% of it might be something to consider, but a default timeout of 60 seconds is hardly every usable in the world of microcontrollers.

As was already mentioned, a default of 0 would be at least non-breaking, but then you explicitly need to set the timeout and if you would change your code to do so, then you probably already have a similar loop right after the call to WiFi.begin()

@Jason2866
Copy link
Collaborator

Jason2866 commented Jan 6, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Imho not every bad incomplete Arduino code should be implemented. Arduino code is not the holey gral and everything else than perfect.
To get core 3.0.0 going let us focus on the needed! changes. Fine tuning is the step after that.
To be clear about my opinion of this PR. Closing. Finished. Done.

@JAndrassy JAndrassy closed this Jan 6, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@TD-er TD-er TD-er left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@JAndrassy @me-no-dev @Jason2866 @TD-er