[PATCH v2] rtems: Generate <rtems/io.h>

Chris Johns chrisj at rtems.org
Sun Oct 11 22:31:09 UTC 2020

On 12/10/20 1:16 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 08/10/2020 08:18, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> On 07/10/2020 21:12, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 11:40 AM Sebastian Huber
>>> <sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de> wrote:
>>>> On 07/10/2020 17:26, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>>>>> Thinking about the discussion about ordering directives in the docs,
>>>>> the generated header reorders directives also. Is it also doing
>>>>> generation by alphabetical order?
>>>>> Should we consider using the same order as defined for the API
>>>>> documentation? I guess this would make the Doxygen consistently
>>>>> ordered wrt the docs.
>>>> This would make things a lot more complicated. For the Doxygen we have
>>>> to take also the C language into account. For example before you use a
>>>> type, it must be declared. This is done through automatic dependency
>>>> tracking and a topological sorting. Adding a manual order into this
>>>> stuff would be difficult.
>>> Yeah, maybe. The value of ordering in the headers and doxygen is
>>> probably less than in a manual. We can revisit later if we like. It
>>> shouldn't be too hard in an API header (as opposed to an
>>> implementation header with inlines) to group first the typedefs and
>>> then the function declarations. But I have no real concern about the
>>> ordering here, it was just a thought.
>> Good, I added a ticket for this:
>> https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/4134#ticket
>> It is not on my high priority list.
> It turned out to be pretty easy to fix with a bubble sort:
> https://git.rtems.org/rtems-central/commit/?id=3f3e088740abc2d00cf9986452bef81eae83260e

Nice. The contextlib has changed since python 2, the redirect looks interesting.

> Generated <rtems/io.h>:
> https://git.rtems.org/rtems/tree/cpukit/include/rtems/io.h

Thank you.

More information about the devel mailing list