Comparison with the `uart_16550` crate

[ChocolateLoverRaj]

Is there any reason to use this crate over uart_16550?

Edit: After looking at this crate I think this crate is better than uart_16550. It still would be nice to have a comparison though. I could make one.

[zdivelbiss]

My original intent in designing this crate was to create something a little more extensive than what uart_16550 offered. It's rather basic, and doesn't idiomatically express the way the UART actually works, per the spec. For instance, uart::Uart<M> has the 'mode' M, to delineate programmatically whether the divisor latch registers are accessible. This felt less error-prone than what uart_16550 decided to do.

I absolutely welcome any contributions you want to make, even if that's just a typed out comparison to help clarify the uses of this crate over what the x86_64 project has created. You can do a PR on README.md, or type it out in a comment here, or edit the main body of your comment.

Thanks for your insight.

[zdivelbiss]

I just realized I didn't create a README at all for this repository lol. I'm quite bad with user-facing documentation like that.