Everything seems to have been done excellently. Are you sure it's the first time you have used git 😄

For the sake of being verbose might I request you add a small description of your changes to changelog.md and then push that commit upstream? I will merge once that has been added.

Hi Rafi,
I have added a one-liner to changelog.md and pushed it.
I have only been using Git as a single-user thing, and most of the time only locally on my computer. This is indeed my first time to make a pull-request. Fingers crossed...

@z3t0
some comment based on a very short/incomplete review

ir_NEC.cpp
delay(200);  // Added by LWH

That is a significant delay to introduce before sending a signal. IS there a good reason for it?

irRC5_RC6.cpp
#define RC5_T1             830 //LWH originally: 889

The original value is correct (830 is not RC5)

void disableIROut ( ) ;

Not sure of the rationale for this? What is it?

Finally, is there a case to be made that sendRC6ext could make use of sendRC5 to achieve the same result with less flash memory used up. (Just generate the parameters required by sendRC5 in sendRC6ext

Are those changes really in the head version? Then I really did mess up :-(
The head version should ONLY contain changes to ir_RC5_RC6.cpp and IRremote.h.
The other things comes from experiments (an Arduino that is receiving from a Sony remote control and passing on signals to a Nec and RC5 devices).
It is a bit late here in Denmark, but tomorrow I will try to figure out how I messed up my head revision.
[Edit] I did not look into RC6 at all, so I do not know if any reuse is possible. I only needed to use RC5 and RC5ext for my project.

@AnalysIR @z3t0 I have verified that the changes from Rafi’s latest version (741d9e, September 10) to my latest version (ddac72, September 19, see screen dump) does not contain any of the experimental stuff you listed. Can you please double check you are seeing the same?

I did joggle around with a few branches, doing experiments for that other project I mentioned, but those hacks should be all gone now. Those experimental branches/commits should really not have been visible to others, but obviously I have not yet fully understood the Git flow. My apologies.

FI: I just clicked on the links earlier in this thread, to find the code...otherwise I'll leave it to @z3t0 to figure it all out :)

New changes since you last viewed
LarsWH added some commits 8 days ago

It all looks good on my side. Will merge after bumping the version number

Awaiting for the checks to finish on the other branch. Will merge after.

@LarsWH This has just been merged onto beta. Will mark it as such and close this PR once it makes it onto a release.

@z3t0 Thank you for accepting my enhancements into your excellent library :-)

Included in 2.5.0