damn that lazy evaluation! LMAO ...a good point brent and yuo have no doubt saved me hours of head scratching this evening when I try out the "new improved software". Oh dear oh dear oh dear...
doOption dev (Forward n) = do
putStrLn $ "> STEP FORWARD " ++ (show n)
stepBits dev ioPORTA [3..0]
doOption dev (Backward n) = do
putStrLn $ "> STEP BACKWARD " ++ (show n)
stepBits dev ioPORTA [0..3]
stepBits dev port = mapM_ stepIt
where stepIt bit = mapM_ (\s -> HW.setPortBit dev port bit s >> stepDelay) [0,1]
I now have the above as my current "final" implementation... hopefully that *does* do what I think it does because mapM_ is driving it and will cause evaluation of the actions?
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 02:59:29PM +0100, emacstheviking wrote:
> I have built a library for using the Hexwax expandIO-USB chip and I have
> now got some code to drive a stepper motor:
>
> doOption :: HWHandle -> Flag -> IO ()
> doOption dev (Backward n) = do
> putStrLn $ "> STEP BACKWARD " ++ (show n)
> let x = [ stepBit b | b <- [3..0]]
> return ()
> where
> stepBit p b = setBit p b 0 >> setBit p b 1
> where setBit p b s = HW.setPortBit dev p b s >> stepDelay
The other posted solutions are good, but I also want to make a very
important comment about the above code: it does not actually step any
bits! All it does is print some stuff. x is simply a name for a list
of IO actions; it is never used so it just gets garbage collected and
the IO actions are never run.
-Brent
_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
Beginners@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners