Do not try to typedef bool for bare-metal.[ch]#242
Conversation
Doing so results in the following with the current compiler in Debian:
```
arm-none-eabi-gcc -march=armv5te -g -Os -marm -fpic -Wall -fno-common -fno-builtin -ffreestanding -nostdinc -fno-strict-aliasing -mno-thumb-interwork -fno-stack-protector -fno-toplevel-reorder -Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-format-nonliteral -Wno-format-security jtag-loop.c bare-metal.c -nostdlib -o jtag-loop.elf -T bare-metal.lds -Wl,-N
In file included from jtag-loop.c:21:
bare-metal.h:59:13: error: 'bool' cannot be defined via 'typedef'
59 | typedef int bool;
| ^~~~
bare-metal.h:59:13: note: 'bool' is a keyword with '-std=c23' onwards
```
I'd have preferred to use `stdbool.h` but that is not easily available with
`-nostdinc`.
|
Could do #243 instead, I think I prefer this one though. |
|
Please don't open two different pull requests with two different ways to solve the same issue, it is quite annoying. If you like one solution over another, just make one pull request for it and discuss other possible ways in the commit message. If maintainers disagree with it, just respin it differently. |
|
That's an interesting issue. What u-boot is doing is the following: Which seems like a good way to handle it without the ugly sed part from your other commit. Thanks! |
|
Sorry, I fat fingered my git push and closed this PR by accidentally deleting the branch instead of updating it. Seems like even after pushing the branch again I can't reopen. Please see #244 instead. |
|
That's fine, as long as there is only one :) |
2 participants
Doing so results in the following with the current compiler in Debian:
I'd have preferred to use
stdbool.hbut that is not easily available with-nostdinc.I don't think this is an issue with the Debian compiler, just the fact that it is new enough to have c23 support and/or this new warning.
The affected function (
uart0_puthex) never appears to have been used from when it was introduced in 4f144b3, so I guess it could be removed, but I figured it might be useful for local debug hacking etc. Could also just remove thenewlinesupport I guess.