Hi Alin,
using a menu option in this case will not work because the point is
not passing a std c99 flag to the compiler, but using some C99
features in the source code to simplify it.
For example: the designated initializer list:
struct test_s test =
{
.second = 2,
.first = 1
};
It is not supported by C89 and adding an entry in the menuconfig will
require duplication in the source code to support both standards (C89
and C99).
BR,
Alan
On 1/8/22, Alin Jerpelea <jerpe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
