Pink Boy wrote:
Charalampos Alexopoulos sez,
Thank you for your answer, but i am not looking for the
easiest way. I want to have some solution similar to previus
example. I can use ISR's even with c++ with no problem, what
i need, as i said before, is to assign a vector as a static
class member in a way similar to other types like :
class foo
{
public:
static constant uint8_t data = 0x0a;
...
}
then you can use it from some other class like:
uint8_t local_data = foo::data;
You scare me. Run away.
I always worry with C++ that I really don't understand what the
compiler is doing when it calls functions. I guess my thought is
that if you can't define the function as an isr inside the class
then what you are trying to do isn't supported.
If I were you and I'm not, I would have an ISR call your static
function, then exit. That will most likely work. In general
though I like to keep what I'm do in an ISR very simple (buffer
data, generate events, time critical stuff) and let the main loop
or a task handle the complex stuff.
I totally agree. An ISR is NOT the place to put "pointer chasing"
C++ dribbles. I don't even like to call a function there! There is no
rule that says that every construct in a C++ program has to use the C++
object paradigms. Define your ISR's using the smallest possible code.
You will NEVER be dealing with an ISR as part of another object, nor
will you ever likely inherit from an ISR. Realistically ISR's are a
thing apart from the rest of the program (usually) so this is rarely an
issue.
IMO, IME,
DLC
Mr Foo
_______________________________________________
AVR-GCC-list mailing list
AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
--
-------------------------------------------------
Dennis Clark TTT Enterprises
www.techtoystoday.com
-------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
AVR-GCC-list mailing list
AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
