Ok, I got git cooperating (for now) I just pushed some minor changes to azwing (Always good to have some review, as when messing with git, I did them in the wrong branches, made a mistake on a copy/paste and I think I've got the fixes up)
Error codes updated, and moved to case statement allowing unknown errors
MaxSlewRate goes to 0 (0.25x) as prior post
TrackingCompensation button added for single/multi-axis (Which relies upon the Compensation Tracking Not being OFF)
Status is displayed as Single,2-Axis,N/A
Write Alignment to EEPROM moved to different line. Text updated.
Did not implement setting MaxSlewRate from status just yet. (:gu# will be better)
Major things I'm working on include the checksum and alignment issues, but I'm not done with them (for the checksum, that's going to be pulling in a lot of code (at every level there's a write function, as well as stuff writing directly to the device, so no function to override there), and I think I've identified most of it.)
As far as the alignment, I'm going to use the INDI alignment system (
www.indilib.org/api/md_libs_indibase_ali...ent_white_paper.html ) and a math module hopefully able to match and download coordinates to OnStep. So far that's been somewhat frustrating, as in some code I've got a wrongness with my test vs what OnStep does. Even if it doesn't, the existing math model would give us some better goto abilities, but wouldn't do the really awesome things that OnStep does with some of the compensation.
One thing I do have is a python script to upload a set of coordinates and solved values to OnStep and let it chew on them. (Idea for the math model is to match that.)
Just to give an idea of how much difference there is in processors math capabilities for alignment, using the same data, and removing restrictions on things like the Mega, with the same coordinates (might have increased the solution resolution, I can't recall, but the test was for the same resolution for all) with a 9-star align:
Mega: 6:46.317029
STM32 2:13.729435
Esp32: 0:27.962810
Note that the Mega also differed, but only very minorly (I think one value was 3 vs 4, another was 68 vs 69, I'm assuming because of precision with the Mega.) Unfortunately, I don't have a teensy to test vs that. That's given me an interesting idea to see about doing that calculation on a SHC (w/esp32 or teensy) Though that would require a fair bit of work. So if hooked up to something like RAMPS, it could do more than the 3 (older + beta) or 6 point (current Alpha) align. Just a thought for the future.
On the errors, it will display the same as the webpage on ESP, except for any like ERR_GOTO_ERR_UNSPECIFIED Mine: "Goto Unspecified Error" Web: "Goto Unknown Error" While if there's an unknown error it will show: "Unknown Error" as I wanted a difference between error 11, ERR_UNSPECIFIED and something we don't recognized thus 'Unknown' vs 'Unspecified', and continued it with the above. I don't use the web page much. So YMMV.
Anyway, I'm probably done for the day, azwing can merge/comment and then push it to main. If someone can check that nothing broke, who isn't on Alpha, that would probably also be good.