In my opinion we should try to keep all platforms and avoid breaking them by adopting new standards
An option would be to add the C99 as a menu option while keeping the current compilers compatibility Best Regards Alin On Sat, 8 Jan 2022, 13:53 Gregory Nutt, <spudan...@gmail.com> wrote: > z80 holds all 8-bit ZiLOG architectures. That means > > z80 using the SDCC compiler > z180 using the SDCC compiler > ez80 which normally uses the ZiLOG compiler, but there is an experimental > version of GCC for the ez80 > > z16 uses only ZiLOG compiler > > Also consider SH1 > > This will also require changes to INVIOLABLES.md and the coding standard. > I would also recommend a formal vote to assure that you are following the > will of the user base and not a personal agenda. There used to be a small > but important group of retro computer folk using NuttX; this eliminates > support for them. There is language in the INVIOLABLES that is there > specifically to protect them from actions like this. > > I have not heard of anyone using these architectures recently. I would say > that only ez80 is active with active development boards. There are > occasional developments with z180-like hardware. > > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 11:40 PM Xiang Xiao <xiaoxiang781...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Ceva we just added this week also supports C99, so we just need to check > > avr, misoc, or1k, z16 and z80. > > > > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 1:35 PM Petro Karashchenko < > > petro.karashche...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > In addition I just checked latest GCC with HC12 support is 3.0.4 > version. > > > It have C99 integrated. Will check with AVR32, but will probably need > > some > > > help with others. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Petro > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022, 7:15 AM Petro Karashchenko < > > > petro.karashche...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > What about inline functions? Those are also a part on C99. > > > > > > > > Are those old architectures checked by the CI? 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 > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > >
