(Reminder that regardless of what you think about cultural sensitivities, these are just *better terms* that much more accurately describe the device roles, and even the I²C defines the term master as the "initiatiating" device)
-
-
Show this thread
-
Cc
@ohsummit, since you're pushing for new definitions for SPI. what do you think about this for I²C? In this case the pin names don't need changing, only device role terminology.Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
That's SPI, not I²C. For SPI I suggested host/device, since the device roles are fixed (unlike I²C), and DU (Data upstream) / DO (Data downstream) instead of MISO/MOSI. Shorter too. I don't think we have settled on this yet though.
- Show replies
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
-
-
-
Happy to see "slave" erased from computing terminology, but "master" by itself still makes plenty of sense in many contexts (though not particularly this one). The word is not specific to slavery and has always been, and still is, widely used.
-
I largely agree (but in most places where you're replacing slave, master also doesn't make sense), though I would like to hear any additional commentary.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
It's going to take a hot minute to rewire a decade of lazy nomenclature. But this is good. This is real good.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
...Initiator? I though the proper terminology was "leader/follower" now?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.