On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 10:12 PM Gregory Nutt <spudan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > depending on CONFIG_CAN_PASS_STRUCTS, > > mallinfo has a different prototype. > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_CAN_PASS_STRUCTS > > struct mallinfo mallinfo(void); > > #else > > int mallinfo(FAR struct mallinfo *info); > > #endif > > > > and we have a lot of #ifdef CONFIG_CAN_PASS_STRUCTS > > for this even in APPDIR. > > i'd like to suggest to simplify this by always using > > "int mallinfo(FAR struct mallinfo *info);" version. > > > > or, even "void mallinfo(FAR struct mallinfo *info);" because it > > doesn't return any errors. > > We should not do that. There are contemporary toolchains that do not > support passing structures or unions. Currently on the SDCC compiler > cannot pass structures. SDCC is one variant of similar compilers > focusing on small MCUs. I imagine that the others have similar > limitations. Currently SDCC is used only with z80 but there has been > talk of using it with other architectures as well, but those have not > gone anywhere. > > Certainly, removing support for SDCC and related compiles would close a > lot of door for not reason other than your personal preference. Certain > the CONFIG_CAN_PASS_STRUCTS is ugly but it serves a real purpose for the > community. Your proposal serves no purpose other than you personal > preference.
i'm not suggesting to remove SDCC support or whatever. my proposal is the opposite. always use the conservative prototype. > > It is worth re-considering the INVIOLABLES.txt which all committers are > expected to uphold: > > All Users Matter > ---------------- > > o All support must apply equally to all supported platforms. At > present > this includes Linux, Windows MSYS, Windows Cygwin, Windows Ubuntu, > Windows native, macOS, Solaris, and FreeBSD. No tool/environment > solutions will be considered that limit the usage of NuttX on > any of > the supported platforms. > o Inclusive rather than exclusive. > o *Hobbyists are valued users of the OS* including retro > computing hobbyists > * and DIY “Maker” hobbyists. > o Supported toolchains: GCC, Clang, *SDCC*, ZiLOG ZDS-II (c89), IAR. > Others? > o No changes to build system should limit use of NuttX by any user. > o *Simplifying things for one user does not justify excluding > another user.* > o *We should seek to expand the NuttX user base, not to limit it > for** > reasons of preference or priority.* > o *We must resist the pull to make NuttX into a Linux-only, > GCC-only, and** > ARM-only solution.* > > I think we must think less about ourselves and less about our own > project environment, and more about the community. > > Greg >
