Am 19.08.2011 12:02, schrieb John Clymer: > So, consensus is to include the register definitions - then I will work > on these. To get all the possible register structures for all possible > peripherals will take some time. And naming conventions come into play > as well. > > I prefer having my device registers defined in structures. Other people > prefer non-structured "flat" definitions for the registers. > > i.e. > > PortA -> DDR > PortA -> PIN > > vs. > > DDRA > PINA > > The current stellaris has a start for structures, unless there are > objections, I would continue with these. > > The actual names of the registers will be best to match the datasheet > (otherwise, non-compiler writing / source reading people will need a > manual [and somewhat lengthy one at that] to provide the correcting > naming of each peripheral and register.) BUT - there is no standard for > what the peripheral structure instances should be named - so again, this > would need to be documented if the target audience is people that won't > be tearing the compiler apart. [And again, more work...]
Afaik there is a standard for the Cortex platform how to do it, google for "ARM Cortex Microcontroller Software Interface Standard" _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel