@Ciro_Bruno please edit your post, using the pencil icon at the bottom, and add triple backticks at the beginning and end of your code so that it displays correctly.
Triple backticks look like this:
I don’t know how you think that providing a list of software libraries is going to allow anyone to help you to resolve this issue.
I belive there might be known conflicts between Blynk and some of the most popular libraries.
All Blynk related instructions have been copied from the standard example.
Would you like to see all the 1650 lines?
In fact I’m not sure I’m allowed to share the complete version of this code, since it’s part of a customer’s project.
@PeteKnight is right, we can’t help you without more information.
You have to provide your sketch, even if it contains 1500 lines, not only the include libraries
We are all volunteers , not from Blynk staff.
I suggest you to transfer your code on Arduino ide , I used VSCode/PlatformIO in the past and I often got issues
I would, if I understood the issue, but so far we’ve just seen conflicting information about the issue.
Your code appears to be top secret, so I’d say that obtaining help to solve your problem is going to be very difficult for you.
I’d suggest that you start by running the example sketch that you linked to and ensuring that this runs in its original form, then gradually adding-in functionality as you progress and testing at each stage until you identify which part of your code breaks the project.
Thank you @Blynk_Coeur . I can recall the last time I’ve used Blynk. It wasn’t suitable for the latest version of Arduino IDE. At that time I was using Arduino IDE PRO and I had to install na earliest version, such as 1.8.10 or 1.8.11, I guess.
This is exactly what I mean by “known conflict” or “known issue”. Looking at my report, within a blink, you tell me:
Migrating back to Arduino is not not an option now. By the launch of Arduino IDE 2.0, the support to ESP32 SPI Flash File Systems has been interrupt. As this is a very important resource for this project, I had to migrate toward VSCode.
Moreover, It’s too late now. There’s already a lot of work and learning employed up to now in VSCode and I can’t afford the time to adapt it all, running risks of functionality and stability in order to apply an fancy but unnecessary feature like Blynk.
Your advise has led me to an important decision, which is leaving Blynk for the next project. Next time, I’m gonna ask first.
Please take it by another point of view. This code isn’t mine.
Me and my partner have been hired to assemble a tailor made solution. I would take care of electronics circuitry and my partner of firmware and application software. My partner, unfortunately, has passed away due to COVID. Then I’ve called other specialist for taking over the application software. But It wouldn’t be feasible to do the same for firmware. That’s why I’m taking care of this.
Since the customer is the true owner of all the technology involved, I can’t myself decide about sharing something that is his property.
The way I found to get on track of understanding the issue and fixing it was by asking in more generic way. People who are used to make use of Blynk together with the libraries and platform I’m using would be able to advise me like @Blynk_Coeur did.
I’m just trying to solve this problem within the limitations I have.
The code clearly does work, under certain circumstances.
Whether it works with your hardware, your version of the Blynk library, your IDE and associated choice of settings and your internet service provider are variables that are beyond Blynk’s control.
It’s always a good idea to go back to basics and test the example sketch with your particular set of circumstances.