More cleanup #31
More cleanup #31
Conversation
| frame = esp_camera_fb_get(); | ||
| // Testing how to get the latest image | ||
| esp_camera_fb_return(frame); | ||
| frame = esp_camera_fb_get(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As far as I can tell, there isn't a clear reason to get and release before getting the frame we'll actually use. If there is, we can incorporate that into the frameLock class
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this may be to clear a buffered frame. test with an actual camera and an image that is changing to confirm ?
| @@ -789,14 +716,13 @@ void loop () { | |||
|
|
|||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Immediately above is a return statement without a esp_camera_fb_return call. Using the frameLock class should change the behavior there as we now will implicitly call esp_camera_fb_return in the class destructor
|
There's enough code changes here that I'm a little nervous merging. Currently looking into Pio test infrastructure to see how we could better automatically review changes like this |
An attempt to make things more readable by separating concerns into separate files. This involves moving enums and associated functions out of the main deployable example file.
Additionally, this adds a RAII class to help manage getting frames from the camera in the main loop. While this doesn't put a formal lock on the frame, it does guarantee that at the end of each loop the frame is properly released preventing errors from successive calls to esp_camera_fb_get between loops