Paul Hutchinson wrote:

> It works very well for me. The only C compiler I use that needed a custom
> LCD file is CCS PCM. For all the other C compilers I use, the standard
> ansi.lcd works fine.
>
> Perhaps the people saying it's not appropriate for small micros also feel
> that standard C is not appropriate for small micros. After all, C was
> designed for and works best, on 16 bit and bigger systems.

There was this one example recently
(http://www.splint.org/pipermail/splint-discuss/2004-November/000516.html):

static uint8_t n;
  
void foo(void)
{
 n = 5;
}

splint seems to assume that 5 is an int (that is, 16 or 32 bit), and it
pops up a warning. The presented solutions were all inadequate: using
character literals (pretty much unreadable and defeats the purpose of using
such a tool to create /better/ code), casting the literals (that would hide
even worse errors), or switch off the type of warning with /*@+charint@*/
which seemingly also lets the following code pass without a warning where
one would be warranted (even though one could say that this is something
the compiler would warn me about):

uint8_t n;
uint16_t u;

foo(void)
{
  n = u;
}

How are you handling this issue?


> Next, and I feel this is important, I cranked
> up the compiler settings to as high as possible. After making sure I fully
> understood all the warnings and their implications, I modified the code to
> make the compiler give no warnings. 

That's not really possible with the HiTech compilers. In the highest
setting, they give warnings about constructs that are necessary -- for
example assigning the two bytes of a 16-bit unsigned int to two separate
unsigned char.

Gerhard
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist