This repository was archived by the owner on Mar 23, 2025. It is now read-only.
add P-touch CUBE Plus PTP710BT to list of supported devices#2
Merged
NotAFile merged 1 commit intoNotAFile:masterfrom Jul 26, 2020
Merged
Conversation
Owner
|
Thanks for testing! |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
the raster command reference for the PT-E550W, PT-P750W and PT-P710BT is here: https://download.brother.com/welcome/docp100064/cv_pte550wp750wp710bt_eng_raster_101.pdf
Looking through, the command set seems to be nearly identical to that of the PT-H500/PT-P700/PT-E500 whose command reference is located here: https://download.brother.com/welcome/docp000771/cv_pth500p700e500_eng_raster_110.pdf
In testing (along with my bluetooth backend in #3), it seems to mostly work. the issues i've noticed are
_debug_status()checks (since they seem to usually not return any data). So probably best would be to just increase the timeout for that final status check (or to fully implement the status messages and phase changes to completely support buffered printing mode, but that seems like a fair bit of work)