On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 1:15 PM Petro Karashchenko < petro.karashche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > What about inline functions? Those are also a part on C99. > > Change to normal function or macro. > Are those old architectures checked by the CI? Not all, arm/mips/risc-v/sim/x86/x86_64/xensa/renesas is enabled in CI, avr/ceva/hc/misoc/or1k/z16/z80 not: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/tree/master/tools/ci/testlist/all.dat > I mean do we have a proof > that those are still compilable with the latest release? > > Best regards, > Petro > > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022, 6:37 AM Xiang Xiao <xiaoxiang781...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 6:29 AM Petro Karashchenko < > > petro.karashche...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hello team, > >> > >> Recently I mr. @Xiang Xiao <xiaoxiang781...@gmail.com> had a discussion > >> in one of the PR's related to C89 code compliance. Particularly related > to > >> initializing a structure by field names (designated initializers). Mr. > @Xiang > >> Xiao <xiaoxiang781...@gmail.com> pointed out that "for the common code > >> it is better to avoid C99 only features". > >> I examined the current NuttX code and see that currently common code is > >> far away from C89 already and things like "<stdbool.h>", "<inttypes.h>", > >> "snprintf", "designated initializers", "__VA_ARGS__" (variadic macro) > are > >> deeply embedded into the code. > >> > >> > > We need separate the features that come from the compiler and the > standard > > library. Since the libc is provided by NuttX self: > > > > 1. The header files(e.g.stdbool.h, intttyes.h) and function(e.g. > > snprintf) can be used in common code since NuttX can provide the > > implementation for all arch even the arch use a very old compiler > > 2. The preprocessor (e.g. __VA_ARGS__) or language( designated > > initializers) feature need to avoid or incorporate into the > conditional > > macro > > > > . > > > >> I would like to come up with the suggestion to make C99 as a > prerequisite > >> for the compiler that is used to build NuttX code. > >> > > > > As Greg said, if compilers used on all arch supported by NuttX support > > C99, there is no reason to limit us to C89. The compiler status is a > > keypoint. > > > > > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Petro > >> > >> >
