1
\$\begingroup\$

why was https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/164973/turning-all-35-leds-on-sequentially-with-mm5451 migrated.

It has nothing to do with the Arduino, it is a general ee question. Is this another baseless "because they have an sucky Arduino" migration?

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ The alternative would have been to close it here. Note that whatever this "MM5451" is was never defined, so probably some arduino thing. No, I'm not going to do a search for something the OP should have provided directly. The rest is solely about software on the arduino. In some unusual cases that could be OK for EE, but in this case it's full of library calls whos job is to obfuscate what is actually happening electrically and provide the illusion of working within a procedural cocoon. In other words, this was a clear ardweenie question. \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Apr 15 '15 at 18:35
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ Wow olin, I bet you never use macros to toggle pins? OP is bit banging a shift register. No Arduino libraries aside from two basic macros are being used... \$\endgroup\$ – Passerby Apr 15 '15 at 18:57
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ If I asked you to look at code that had macros to toggle pins, I'd tell you what they were first. \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Apr 15 '15 at 19:52
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ It literally goes define pin X, set pin x as output, write pin X as 1. You need that weenified for you @olin ? \$\endgroup\$ – Passerby Apr 15 '15 at 20:01
8
\$\begingroup\$

Arduino mod here. I've been asked to migrate the question back to EE, but in this case I'm inclined to leave it on the Arduino site.

I think it's a decent question and is potentially within the scope of either site. The main reason I'm not migrating it back is because it's been answered. The goal of migration (according to the Stack Exchange guidelines) is to ensure a question has the best chance of a good answer. It seems to have got that now so re-migration seems unnecessary.

However, I agree with those who are saying it shouldn't have been migrated to us in the first place (or at least not quite so quickly). The question was about the shift register, not the Arduino itself. If it had been lingering for several days with no answer then it might be different. Please try not to jump-the-gun though.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I saw your custom reply on my flag already, but thank you for also posting your take here. Good call on not migrating back, and I agree that it shouldn't have been migrated in the first place (at least not so quickly). \$\endgroup\$ – user17592 Apr 15 '15 at 21:17
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ No, the question assumed a lot of arduino context. I can understand that is fine on your site, but not here. "Ardweenies need not apply". A good test is if you replace "arduino" with "microcontroller development board" and the question still makes sense, then it could possibly be OK for here. When a question mentions "arduino", especially in the title, it probably shouldn't be here. And, don't even think about saying "shield" or "sketch". Don't understimate how much attempting to repurpose a existing EE term like "shield" really really pisses people off here. \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Apr 15 '15 at 21:33
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ @Olin Why is something off-topic just because it requires platform-specific knowledge? Wouldn't that rule-out a huge variety of questions on non-Arduino topics too? \$\endgroup\$ – Peter Bloomfield Apr 15 '15 at 21:41
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ The difference is that ardweenie questions 1: Arrogantly use private lingo regarless of long-standing convetions in EE. 2: Generally show little knowledge of or interest in the underlying electronics. 3: Just assume everyone knows about specifics of their platform. 4: The problem is usually one of programming. Low level programming as it relates to the underlying hardware is on topic here, as are issues related to architecting code for small resource-limited systems. However, general programming questions that just happen to run on a microcontroller are not on topic. \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Apr 15 '15 at 23:25
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ The question was about the shift register, not the Arduino itself. If it had been lingering for several days with no answer then it might be different. Please try not to jump-the-gun though. THIS. \$\endgroup\$ – Passerby Apr 15 '15 at 23:28
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ However, general programming questions that just happen to run on a microcontroller are not on topic Time to go downvote all your answers to these type of off topic question then @olin /sarc \$\endgroup\$ – Passerby Apr 15 '15 at 23:31
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @OlinLathrop I agree that Arduino lives in its own bizarre little world, and I appreciate that it's a pointless hindrance for an accomplished EE expert like you. It's proven to be effective for casual users though, and its terminology and libraries are publicly documented for anybody with the time and inclination to look them up. Some people here may be willing to do that. If a question is bad then close it by all means. However, berating the platform as a whole and trying to sweep away questions purely because they do things in an unconventional way isn't justified and doesn't help anyone. \$\endgroup\$ – Peter Bloomfield Apr 16 '15 at 11:24
3
\$\begingroup\$

Two-thirds of that question is Arduino code. The folks at Arduino.SE are more knowledgeable about Arduino code and more willing to read it than folks here on EE.SE .

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ By Arduino code you mean the toggle pin digital write and pin setting? Right, th arts totally Arduino specific. OP in that question is purely bit banging a shift register without any real libraries being g used aside from some basic macros that every microcontroller uses. \$\endgroup\$ – Passerby Apr 15 '15 at 18:55
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Last time I checked, "People here are not willing to read your code" was no close/off topic/migration reason. I also find it a very, very poor representation of this community. \$\endgroup\$ – user17592 Apr 15 '15 at 19:04
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @Passe: Just about every line in the executable part of that code is a arduino-specific function call or macro. If any of that directly relates to electronics, he needs to say so and explain if posting here. The question is clearly written assuming much arduino context. It would need to be closed in that state here, but over in the arduino forum such context can probably be assumed. \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Apr 15 '15 at 19:05
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @olin obviously you didn't read the code. There is three Arduino functions used. Pin set to output, digital write to set a pin to high or low, and the sprint line to echo values to the serial port for debugging. All other functions are standard c or defined in the code. And those three are plain English, have identical standard c usages, and the code is nicely commented. \$\endgroup\$ – Passerby Apr 15 '15 at 19:32
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @Passe: Without even scrolling thru the code, I see pinMode, digitalWrite, Serial.begin, pulseCLK, ssrWriteLSB, and delay. You can't expect us to know the exact details of these function within the arduino context. And before you say I should infer them, it's often these details that matter. Adrduino questions need to be asked very differently here than on arduino.SE, and this one was asked in the arduino way. It does not belong here without significant modification, but is probably OK over there as is, hence migration was reasonable. \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Apr 15 '15 at 19:47
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Pulse clock, and ssrwritemsb are defined in the code provided. The others have plain English names. You know, if I go through all of your answers for questions with code where functions and macros are used but not explained would i find a single Tsk about it, or is it just for Arduino \$\endgroup\$ – Passerby Apr 15 '15 at 20:08
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @Olin, I have asked several questions on here that are very specific to the STM32F4 libraries - you would need to know the specifics of that platform to give a proper answer. If those questions are okay, why isn't this one? \$\endgroup\$ – Greg d'Eon Apr 16 '15 at 12:08
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Perhaps if there were an ARM cortex stack, those questions would get migrated there, but there isn't \$\endgroup\$ – Scott Seidman Apr 16 '15 at 19:58
-2
\$\begingroup\$

It was migrated in the context of Operation: Migrate Everything.

It should not have been migrated, since, as you've said,

OP in that question is purely bit banging a shift register without any real libraries being used aside from some basic macros that every microcontroller uses.

Unfortunately, there does not seem to be a way to stop all this migrating. (Y)our best bet is to flag the post on Arduino.SE, and ask for a migration back. I've done that successfully before.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ Stop beating that dead horse already. \$\endgroup\$ – Matt Young Apr 15 '15 at 19:54
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Continuous problems are in need of continuous 'beating'. \$\endgroup\$ – user17592 Apr 15 '15 at 19:57
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ When only one person is doing the beating, maybe it's time to change what's being beaten. \$\endgroup\$ – Matt Young Apr 15 '15 at 19:57
  • \$\begingroup\$ Check the vote counts. I'm not the only one. This question is yet another example. But yes, I'd love to see the thing being beaten to change so that beating is no longer necessary. \$\endgroup\$ – user17592 Apr 15 '15 at 19:58
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Forgot the vote count, you're the only one that is being so vocal about it. If no one else cares enough to speak up, then give it a rest. \$\endgroup\$ – Matt Young Apr 15 '15 at 20:00
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Only people who are vocal have a say (no pun intended) in community decisions? So, what do you want? That everyone who thinks the same asks a separate question on Meta so that we can see who really cares enough? We have vote counts so that we do not get such duplicates. \$\endgroup\$ – user17592 Apr 15 '15 at 20:04
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ We will not stop complaining about the rules being broken \$\endgroup\$ – Passerby Apr 15 '15 at 20:09
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Passerby I would love to be informed of what rule is being broken by migrating a question somewhere it will get a better answer. \$\endgroup\$ – Matt Young Apr 15 '15 at 20:15
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Matt the one where on topic questions should not be migrated \$\endgroup\$ – Passerby Apr 15 '15 at 20:16
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @Passerby I really don't see why you're so butthurt about this. If you want to answer it that badly, go to the Arduino stack. Like Olin said in the comments, that code is nothing but a chain of Arduino functions. Let the people that are familiar with that ecosystem have it. \$\endgroup\$ – Matt Young Apr 15 '15 at 20:18
  • \$\begingroup\$ @MattYoung on SO, I answer questions about using regular expressions in a C# context even though I don't know scrap about C#. I know regular expressions from other languages, and can perfectly answer those C# questions because they have nothing to do with C# itself. Similarly, users here can perfectly answer questions that are not specific to Arduino. Valuable knowledge can get lost when migrating questions to a smaller site. We should be especially cautious of migrating questions to Arduino: it's still in Beta and if it gets shut down, all content will have to be migrated back / gets lost. \$\endgroup\$ – user17592 Apr 15 '15 at 20:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ @matt why are you so butt hurt about it being here? \$\endgroup\$ – Passerby Apr 15 '15 at 20:53
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Passerby As a general rule, I would rather see questions where they'll get the best answer. If it stayed, I probably wouldn't have said anything if it got answered. Crap like this is what ruffles my feathers. \$\endgroup\$ – Matt Young Apr 15 '15 at 20:58

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .