Armin-Hagen Weiss

Remove compiler switch TSN_SUPPORT and related dead code

We don't agree with the change proposed in #463, and think that the current behaviour is correct! The author of the ticket hasn't taken the resultCode included as part of the PD callback into the consideration. If there a timeout for any PD subscriber, the callback with TRDP_TIMEOUT_ERR result code has the 'last received' sequence counter and 'last received' data. If I take different examples, considering that the successive rows happen chronologically after 1 second and timeout is 3 seconds for...

We don't agree with the change proposed in #463, and think that the current behaviour is correct! The author of the ticket hasn't taken the resultCode included as part of the PD callback into the consideration. If there a timeout for any PD subscriber, the callback with TRDP_TIMEOUT_ERR result code has the 'last received' sequence counter and 'last received' data. If I take different examples, considering that the successive rows happen chronologically after 1 second and timeout is 3 seconds for...

We don't agree with the change proposed in #463, and think that the current behaviour is correct! The author of the ticket hasn't taken the resultCode included as part of the PD callback into the consideration. If there a timeout for any PD subscriber, the callback with TRDP_TIMEOUT_ERR result code has the 'last received' sequence counter and 'last received' data. If I take different examples, considering that the successive rows happen chronologically after 1 second and timeout is 3 seconds for...

We don't agree with the change proposed in #463, and think that the current behaviour is correct! The author of the ticket hasn't taken the resultCode included as part of the PD callback into the consideration. If there a timeout for any PD subscriber, the callback with TRDP_TIMEOUT_ERR result code has the 'last received' sequence counter and 'last received' data. If I take different examples, considering that the successive rows happen chronologically after 1 second and timeout is 3 seconds for...

We don't agree with the change proposed in #463, and think that the current behaviour is correct! The author of the ticket hasn't taken the resultCode included as part of the PD callback into the consideration. If there a timeout for any PD subscriber, the callback with TRDP_TIMEOUT_ERR result code has the 'last received' sequence counter and 'last received' data. If I take different examples, considering that the successive rows happen chronologically after 1 second and timeout is 3 seconds for...

We don't agree with the change proposed in #463, and think that the current behaviour is correct! The author of the ticket hasn't taken the resultCode included as part of the PD callback into the consideration. If there a timeout for any PD subscriber, the callback with TRDP_TIMEOUT_ERR result code has the 'last received' sequence counter and 'last received' data. If I take different examples, considering that the successive rows happen chronologically after 1 second and timeout is 3 seconds for...

We don't agree with the change proposed in #463, and think that the current behaviour is correct! The author of the ticket hasn't taken the resultCode included as part of the PD callback into the consideration. If there a timeout for any PD subscriber, the callback with TRDP_TIMEOUT_ERR result code has the 'last received' sequence counter and 'last received' data. If I take different examples, considering that the successive rows happen chronologically after 1 second and timeout is 3 seconds for...