Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Kelsey Bjarnason Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.embedded Subject: Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 20:06:38 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 50 Message-ID: References: <4iah09-1p2.ln1@spankydtr.localhost.net> <_ImdnTsu9qPQ5avSnZ2dnUVZ8gCdnZ2d@lyse.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="1slvsP1WECuGs7FJVcqjxw"; logging-data="26845"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19BLZsZ69LQMwh0fWgDJX+Co9lALOy/dcU=" User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies) Cancel-Lock: sha1:UsgmCqFXGqvGhtBO5Rx098DfMsM= Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.os.linux.advocacy:89192 comp.os.linux.embedded:131 On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 23:31:33 +0000, 7 wrote: > Grant Edwards wrote: > >> On 2012-02-13, 7 >> wrote: >>> Tauno Voipio wrote: >>> >>>>>> So let me get this right - /your/ code is perfect, but other >>>>>> developers' code is crap and it's all because of the evil ARM CMSIS >>>>>> library programmers? >>>>> >>>>> Nearly not correct. I have problems with CMSIS librarians who can't >>>>> get their act together right on the issue of giving flags names.. >>>>> And judging by your comments, I probably have a secondary issue now >>>>> with CMSIS librarians not working with compiler makers to sing from >>>>> the same hymn sheet over how named flags should be get implemented >>>>> when read/modify/write operations are requested. >>>> >>>> How about running your code without CMSIS, instead of whining? >>>> >>>> My ARMs have been runnung happily without a bit of CMSIS code. >>> >>> Then you miss the point I made earlier that your code won't be >>> compatible to mine as we would both use different names and methods to >>> access registers. >> >> This may sound a bit flip, but my first response is "so?". >> >> After using ARM parts for over a decade, I have yet to run into the >> requirement that my code be compatible with yours. > > I've had to debug other people's code. Its damn hard if they guy has > written everything their own way Everyone writes code "their own way", even with formal coding standards in place. > and with numbers instead of designated > registers and flag names. Magic numbers are poor coding practice, period. Why aren't you having a word or three with them - or their management? > When a newer model came out, I spec'd the newer software to be written > without use of hard coded numbers. Neat trick. So, if you need to write something to, say, port 39 how do you do it without encoding the number 39 somewhere?