When talking about inline I'm referring to "static inline" functions like in https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/blob/c55085c0d8864c9401de97872ab3463d474f262c/include/nuttx/mutex.h and not to "inline_function" define from compiler.h. At least I do not find "#define inline" (to empty) in compiler.h
Best regards, Petro On Sat, Jan 8, 2022, 2:55 PM Gregory Nutt <spudan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Inline is not an issue. There is a file at include/nuttx/compiler.h that > handles superficial differences between tools. If the compiler does not > support inline, it is simply undefined. > > I have built ez80 using the ZiLOG tools fairly recently, but none of the > others. It worked fine. > > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 11:15 PM 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 > > >> > > >> > > >
