You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Closes#2552
This is the most straightforward de-duplication approach, essentially
"pushing down" the knowledge of whether a device requires a rail or not.
This change *matches* the current behavior, and that of the system prior
to #2538, and replaces the pre-existing by-rail-name accessor with the
newer by-rail-name accessor (giving it the pre-existing accessor's nicer
name).
It *feels* like this change might not go far enough yet: for all of the
devices we are creating, it is probably statically knowable whether that
device SHOULD or SHOULD NOT have a rail index. For example, `Bmr491` and
`Tps546B24A` do not, and previously had a "dead" rail parameter that
I've removed.
For correctness' sake, it feels like we should ideally fail out at
compile time if a device SHOULD have multiple rails, and doesn't
(according to the app toml), OR if a device SHOULDN'T have multiple
rails, but does (according to the app toml).
0 commit comments