Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #88475

Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers

Date 2012-02-12 10:24 +0100
From David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.os.linux.embedded
Subject Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers
References <WGiYq.100467$WX2.28685@newsfe28.ams2> <4iah09-1p2.ln1@spankydtr.localhost.net> <PYqZq.3558$FY5.2955@newsfe10.ams2> <_ImdnTsu9qPQ5avSnZ2dnUVZ8gCdnZ2d@lyse.net> <u7EZq.13069$2t3.756@newsfe09.ams2>
Message-ID <PLedncuK6o_cGKrSnZ2dnUVZ7oSdnZ2d@lyse.net> (permalink)

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


On 12/02/12 01:56, 7 wrote:
> David Brown wrote:
>
>> On 11/02/12 10:58, 7 wrote:
>>> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>>>
>>>> [snips]
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 23:43:43 +0000, 7 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Typically the CMSIS library forces you to write code using hard coded
>>>>> numbers. So you want to set some flag to enable an interrupt it would
>>>>> read something like
>>>>>
>>>>> SYSCON->INT |= (1<<4)
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is the crunch, who the hell is going to know if its the 4th bit or
>>>>> the 14th bit when you got a million of these lines of code?
>>>>>
>>>>> Shortest possible answer NOBODY. Not even you!!!!!!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> And then you change CPU, and something changes in hardware, how will
>>>>> you know what to look for - you gonna search for "4" all throughout the
>>>>> code?????
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are you actually using a tool so bad it doesn't let you define your own
>>>> symbols?
>>>>
>>>> define	INT_XMA	(1<<   4)
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> SYSCON->INT |= INT_XMA
>>>>
>>>> Need to change INT_XMA?  Change it in one place, *every* usage of it
>>>> changes.  If your development tools can't cope with this - and, ideally,
>>>> with include files - then you should consider using a macro preprocessor
>>>> to generate the compilable code from the maintainable code.
>>>>
>>>> Either way, has nothing to do with ARM, per se; just to do with an
>>>> apparently crippled toolchain and/or a developer who can't look beyond
>>>> the trivial tool to see possible solutions.
>>>
>>>
>>> The point I was making has been snipped.
>>>
>>> The way I do it is independent of all these issues and much more verbose.
>>>
>>>
>>> #define INT_XMA (1<<   4)
>>> #define ENABLE_RS232  SYSCON->INT |= INT_XMA
>>>
>>>
>>> The problem I am having is what does that '4' mean. Is it 4 or 14 or
>>> something else? I need a datasheet. Thats just crap programming.
>>>
>>> What I want to be able to do is
>>>
>>> #define ENABLED 1
>>> #define ENABLE_RS232_INTERRUPT  SYSCON.INT.INT_XMA = ENABLED
>>>
>>> or something similar which is what PIC libraries do.
>>> The flag has been defined for you so that you don't have to figure
>>> out INT_XMA is (1<<   4) or (1<<   14) sifting through a datasheet.
>>> When a CPU is changed, the magic of giving names to flags
>>> still works and saves a lot of time when checking.
>>>
>>>
>>> If you care to look at the support forums and sample code,
>>> you will also find most programmers set multiple flags
>>> with one setting.
>>> That makes the problem 100 times worse because its even more
>>> work trying to figure out which flags have been set.
>>>
>>> The programmers who wrote the CMSIS libraries should be shot
>>> and replaced with programmers who are a little more wiser.
>>> They should spend more time with compiler writers that support
>>> ARM to make sure that everybody sings from the same song sheet.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I would recommend a useful little feature that most programming
>> languages support - "comments".
>>
>> Magic numbers are a problem if the same number is used several times in
>> a program, or if they are used without explanatory comments.  But with a
>> comment explaining what "(1<<  4) | (1<<  14)" means in this situation,
>> it is perfectly good programming.
>
>
> Thats just crap!
>
> I am most definitely not worried about my commented code.
> I write gazillion lines of complex multi-threaded
> working code and I don't remember a word
> of it after a few days. So everything is based on search,
> doxygen, call diagrams, html documentation and the rest.
>
> The point I am making is over what others are doing or not doing.
>
> And I blame the CMSIS librarians for creating this situation
> in the first place.
>
> I am switching to ARM from PIC and I can see the rot from
> the outside. ARM's developers are blind in a most deliberate
> way if they think they can get away with it.
>
>

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?

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar


Thread

Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> - 2012-02-10 21:22 -0800
  Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2012-02-11 09:58 +0000
    Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-02-11 15:16 +0100
      Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2012-02-12 00:56 +0000
        Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2012-02-12 10:24 +0100
          Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2012-02-12 08:21 -0500
          Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2012-02-12 19:12 +0000
            Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2012-02-13 08:54 +0200
              Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2012-02-13 21:37 +0000
                Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-02-13 22:07 +0000
                Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2012-02-13 23:31 +0000
                Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2012-02-13 23:31 +0000
                Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2012-02-13 23:31 +0000
                Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2012-02-14 10:35 +0100
                more troll spew from eternal-september.org 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2012-02-14 11:27 +0000
                Re: more troll spew from eternal-september.org Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2012-02-14 13:17 +0100
                Re: more troll spew from eternal-september.org Big Steel <SteelOne@SteelOne.com> - 2012-02-14 07:55 -0500
                Re: more troll spew from eternal-september.org Foster <frankfoster50@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-14 09:09 -0500
                Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers Foster <frankfoster50@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-14 08:38 -0500
                Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2012-02-13 17:21 -0500
            Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2012-02-13 09:12 +0100
    Re: Reading the Riot Act To ARM's developers Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> - 2012-02-11 10:34 -0800

csiph-web