1+1 is 2.

But extend the numbers a bit, and something obvious that you learn in first grade, isn't so obvious anymore:

11+11 is 22
111+111 is 222
1111+1111 is 2222 - or maybe 174
11111+11111 is 22222 - or maybe 206
111111+111111 is 222222 - or maybe 14 or maybe 25614

So simple math will suddenly become twisted and strange if you somewhere have a limitation, computing with 8-bit or 16-bit numeric range.
Even more advanced if the numbers are actually two-complement so the addition of two positive numbers results in a negative result.

It is these hidden twists that can't just be ignored.

You have still not mentioned if you power the sensor separately or if it is capacitively driven. No mention of cable length or type of cable. No mention if time constant is important or not.

So in the end, we are not talking about simple/advanced. We are talking about you selecting to silently ignore things. When we mention them, you either ignore our comments or complains they are irrelevant. But you have never once given any information why our requests for additional information should be irrelevant.

And it has many times been covered that there are a large number of implementations already available. But you must either build identical hardware, or modify the code to match your specific hardware. The hardware that you have never mentioned what it looks like. And if we post source code for one-wire communication, it will be just as hardware-specific as any other code you can find on the net. In the end, one-wire code will only work if the code matches the actual hw implementation. This is a simple fact. You can't ignore it (unless you just happen to be lucky and builds some random hardware that just happens to match the design the code was intended for).