Joel Bodenmann

The code attachments you provided don't seem to compile and seem generally incomplete. We'll gladly help wherever we can but we can't do guess work. Please provide a minimal example and explain what "does not work". I'd recommend you to either implement a custom widget from scratch (there is documentation on that as well as the aforementioned examples) or to copy the existing tabset and modifying it as needed. Your last post seems to go the right direction

Before we look at this, could you maybe add a bit more detail than "it's not working"?

I just had a closer look at this. In case of anything inheriting from the container class, the custom draw is only responsible for the client area of the container which explains why this didn't work out for you. The proper way of doing this would be to implement a custom widget to facilitate your needs as demonstrated by the documentation and various existing widgets (there are also two examples in the downloads section). If you prefer a quick'n'dirty solution you could change the current drawtabs() implementation to render the tabs with images instead. You might be sneaky with some weak pointers here. Long term, the best approach would be to create a custom VMT for the Tabset and having a function pointer in there for the non-client-area drawing.

Hello & Welcome to the µGFX community! You can customize the look'n'feel of any widget to match your needs. The easy approach here is to implement a custom drawing/rendering function for the existing widget. This means that you keep using the existing tabset widget behavior and you only change the way it is being rendered. There is a full example in the documentation showing how to add an icon to a pushbutton widget. The process will be the same for the tabset: https://wiki.ugfx.io/index.php/Creating_a_custom_rendering_routine You can use the void* parameter to pass in anything you like such as an images array or a complete custom type. This should cover any scenario where you are happy with the existing behavior but want more control over the visual look. In case that you also want to have different behavior, you can implement your own widget: https://wiki.ugfx.io/index.php/Creating_a_widget

Thank you for sharing your driver with the community! Luckily, v3 will end the pain of deviating initialization sequences

That is indeed correct. The reason why it might be "ambiguous" is because the driver interfaces & board files are designed to be as agnostic as possible. There are scenarios where the same driver & display controller is used in a scenario where "acquire bus" and "release bus" does not simply translate to controlling the SPI CS. But in any case I agree that this should be documented more clearly - especially with some basic examples. Just in case this isn't clear: The configuration file (gfxconf.h) is something that you have to provide. There is a sample file you can copy from the top-level directory of the µGFX library distribution (gfxconf.example.h). Usually you'd copy that and rename it to gfxconf.h and that's it. Where this is placed is entirely transparent to the µGFX library as long as you get your include paths correct (which is toolchain/buildsystem/IDE specific). Given that the µGFX library was purposefully designed to be entirely agnostic to everything there is no "one-size fits all" solution from our side. However, a basic guideline can be: If you use a Makefile based buildsystem, simply include the µGFX Makefile If you use a CMake based buildsystem, simply include the µGFX CMake module If you use some proprietary or non-standard build system or something hidden behind an IDE that is either difficult or impossible to modify, use the single-file-inclusion mechanism if you don't need multiple-display support If none of the cases above work, put in the elbow grease and manually add the necessary C files & include paths to whatever system it is you're using essentially treating the µGFX library like "your own code". But in any case, just take the µGFX library source code and treat it as a black-box. i.e. copy paste the code somewhere on the filesystem. No matter what build system integration option you use this will ensure that you can upgrade transparently to newer versions down the road. Where you place this directory and how you manage that is up to the consuming project. We put a lot of effort into ensuring that it's entirely portable from our side. That is reasonable There is the overall "architecture" documentation here: https://wiki.ugfx.io/index.php/Architecture There is a dandy chart in the GDISP documentation about the overall structure of the module: https://wiki.ugfx.io/index.php/GDISP Don't hesitate to ask if you have any questions. We'll gladly help out wherever we can.

Hello & Welcome to the µGFX community! You're certainly at the right spot then! This was one of the major design goals of the µGFX library. Thank you for your feedback. I agree that more documentation should be added to the board files. Although it does not address your point (because it still doesn't properly document the required board file implementation) this resource might still help: https://wiki.ugfx.io/index.php/Display_Driver_Model Can you provide a bit more information on this? What exactly do you mean by "converting your blue color yields a 0"? The GDISP driver is supposed to declare the correct pixel format: https://git.ugfx.io/uGFX/ugfx/src/branch/master/drivers/gdisp/ILI9341/gdisp_lld_config.h#L21 From there, the µGFX library should handle color conversions correctly. The single-file-inclusion mechanism primarily exists to easily integrate the µGFX library into non-standard build systems (usually proprietary IDEs) as to avoid having to manually list all include paths and source files. The only disadvantage of using the single-file-inclusion mechanism is that multiple display support won't work (i.e. you can only ever have one display). You should not have to include anything yourself. The only thing you have to do is adding src/gfx_mk.c to your build system. Everything else inside the library itself is self-contained within that structure. Documentation on this is here: https://wiki.ugfx.io/index.php/Getting_Started#Single_File_Inclusion Can you provide more details on the issues you're encountering? Which build system are you using? The library itself supports Make and CMake out-of-the-box. Let me know if you need an example of how to use the µGFX library in a CMake scenario. On the board-file level you can do pretty much anything you want including using C++ code. Note that the GDISP module provides a config flag GDISP_NEED_MULTITHREAD. If you set this to GFXON, the GDISP module maintains a mutex to facilitate threadsafety when accessing the actual display itself. This is entirely transparent in terms of API. That is reasonable. When the µGFX library is used in a C++ environment the typical scenario is to write the board file implementation in plain C and simply using C++ for the application level stuff. The core library and the drivers usually take away all the heavy lifting so implementation of board files in C is pretty painless. What exactly do you mean by "preferred directory structure"? Usually you'd include the µGFX library and not touch it. Leave it as a self-contained 3rd-party software component. The only thing that goes into the consuming project itself is the configuration file (gfxconf.h) and the board file (or custom driver if needed). Which problems are you observing? The idea is that the board file is simply #included which means that it can live anywhere as long as the path is in the compiler's include paths list. Furthermore, the board file is the only piece of software which interacts with the underlying OS / HAL. Therefore, it is easy to use anything you like (be it ChibiOS, FreeRTOS, Baremetal, Linux or anything else. The only thing that needs to be adapted is the board file. This design has served us well for over a decade and we haven't heard of any problems with this particular aspect yet. We'd be very keen on hearing more details on this so we can potentially improve the situation. If you can add a bit more detail to the issues you're encountering we'll gladly help & clarify where we can.

Children inside the container will be moved automatically when you move the parent container.

You should be able to make the container larger than the display and then move it with `gwinMove()`. Alternatively, you might want to use the List widget which already implements proper scrolling: https://wiki.ugfx.io/index.php/List Note that this widget can be heavily customized to fit your needs. There is an example on the forum showing how to use it for an icon grid.

We'd need a bit more information to provide you with specific answers. In general, assuming that you have Linux running on your SOM it should be as easy as compiling an µGFX application for Linux: https://wiki.ugfx.io/index.php/Linux However, whether you can use the X, SDL or FrameBuffer driver or whether you need to use one of the other GDISP drivers depends on how your system is built (eg. how the display is connected), whether you're running a WM and so on. If you can provide more information we'll gladly point you towards the right direction.

Glad to hear that! Happy that we could help. Please don't hesitate to ask if you have any further questions.

Hello & Welcome to the µGFX community! Yes, it is possible (and very common) to do this with the µGFX library. The library has been designed to run on virtually any system/platform. Depending your system you can either use one of the "Linux" drivers (eg. X, SDL or framebuffer) or directly interface a display via GDISP (if you have a display not "integrated" into the OS).

It doesn't have "an advantage". It's just a variant of the string rendering function which also fills in the background whereas the other one doesn't. Which one is the "correct" one to use depends on what you are doing. Sometimes you don't want to override the background. Just as a side note, you can also use the various gdispGXxx() functions without the capital 'G' in them (for example just gdispFillString() or gdispDrawString()). This way you don't have to specify your display on every function call.

Glad to hear that

It's difficult to say anything helpful without getting any more details. If you call gdispGDrawString() repeatedly without clearing the area first it would be quite likely that your text will look jagged as you would basically "override" the "anti-aliasing pixels" every time further offsetting their true/apparent color values. Try to clear the area first. Alternatively, use another string rendering function (there are some variants that render with a box & background).

Hello & Welcome to the µGFX community! Can you explain a bit more what exactly you mean? One option is to use ROMFS. It comes with a little utility to convert any file into a C array essentially allowing you to "embed" files into your binary. The GFILE module allows to transparently load an image from any supported filesystem (including ROMFS). This means that you can develop your GUI on a desktop machine using one of the corresponding drivers (SDL2, X, Win32, ...) and load the files directly from the host's filesystem via NATIVEFS and if you build binaries for your embedded target you just switch over to ROMFS. All of this works without modifying a single line of your application code. I hope this helps. Please don't hesitate to ask if you have any further questions.

Hey, It seems like you just copied the same compiler output as in your initial post. Please provide a bit more information as requested in my first post.

Hello! Can you provide a bit more information regarding your environment? The errors you're getting certainly indicate that you didn't enable a GOS port (the main system abstraction layer). You can read more about that here: https://wiki.ugfx.io/index.php/GOS If you're using zephyr there is an existing port: https://wiki.ugfx.io/index.php/Zephyr If you're using another underlying operating system such as FreeRTOS there are also existing ports for those. If instead you're not using any underlying operating system (baremetal) you can use the Raw32 port: https://wiki.ugfx.io/index.php/BareMetal Also, which build system are you using?

Hey, Based on the compilation errors it seems like you didn't setup the inclusion paths properly. I haven't used Eclipse in a while, maybe someone else can chime in to help. But I'm fairly certain that it has (at least in part) to do with the paths setup. Is the use of ${ProjName} valid in those paths? And if so, does it make sense that the paths are prefixed with / ? Have you tried adding the paths exactly as they are shown in the documentation that you linked (here) ?

Hey Michael, Well, that is exactly what we are here for: To answer questions, help to guide along the way and most importantly: Improve upon feedback. If you can tell us in a little more detail which details are unclear, and to which questions you didn't find any answers we will gladly provide the necessary information and update the corresponding documentation Best regards, ~ Joel

Hello & Welcome to the µGFX community! In general, the µGFX library is known to work well on ESP32 platforms. There are plenty of customers and hobby-ists which reported quite satisfying results. Both porting and writing new display drivers is pretty easy and well documented. We're happy to help wherever we can. Do you have any specific questions we might be able to answer?

We don't know everything and we're always open for suggestions

Glad to hear that you got it working! Things like that are not as easy / as straight-forward as they might seem at first. For example, if the underlying system is configured to run in tickless mode, things start to look very different already. We try our best to add rules, checks and so on wherever sensible within the µGFX library but everything that is interface related, especially the port to the underlying OS (if any) is not easy to sanity check in a generic manner. After all, this is embedded. It's very easy to shoot yourself in the food and hard to prevent that without bloating everything or limiting use case scenarios.

Well yes, theoretically this is certainly possible. If your host has enough RAM and fast enough I/O you can certainly do this. The question would then be: why? I can only assume that this would be for educational purposes (which is fine). Traditionally, microcontrollers/CPUs are very bad at a task like this. Which is why you'd usually use a dedicated display controller. If you want to implement one yourself, you might have a much better time using an FPGA. All of that aside, usually physical display drivers (like yours) will have some minimum requirements regarding the main pixel clock. That should be your first thing to check whether you can keep up with that. Next, there are usually rather tight timing windows for the synchronization signals. Assuming that you can satisfy the I/O requirements your next consideration will be memory: For your 800*400 display you'll need 800*480*bytes-per-pixel of memory for your framebuffer. So for RGB565 that would be 768 kB. For RGB888 it would be around 1.15 MB. Does your STM32 have this much memory available? You'd most likely have to add external memory via the FSC/FSMC bus. Then you'll run into bandwidth limitations. Look at the specs of that driver chip. It will allow you to calculate the minimum bandwidth required to keep it working. Again, while potentially possible, in a real life scenario your MCU will simply not be able to keep up with it. I'm not trying to discourage you from doing this. I just want to roughly (!) explain the situation. You might be able to get this to work with an STM32 microcontroller but you'll not have a good time with it nor will you have much of it left to do anything else. This is why ST includes a dedicated display controller (LTDC) in some of their MCUs. Maybe if you can describe your intentions/ambitions/ideas/goals a bit we can be of more help here.

The HX8664/HX864 is just a display driver - it's not a display controller. The interface it offers appears to be a standard "raw" RGB interface where you have your parallel RGB input as well as signals for vertical & horizontal synchronization. That input basically needs to be driven constantly to "see" something on the actual display. That would be the job of the display controller. You cannot interface the HX8664/HX8264 in any meaningful way directly. What you seem to have is just a display panel with a display driver. You still need a physical display controller to generate those continuous RGB interface signals. Either you need another dedicated display controller OR you actually use the STM32 LTDC - which is a display controller built into some STM32 devices for exactly this situation. The µGFX library provides a driver for the STM32 LTDC display controller so you should be able to use that out of the box. I'm not sure why you want to explicitly avoid the STM32 LTDC peripheral but that's exactly what you'd need in this case (or any other display controller).