On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 4:15 AM, Cillian O'Donnell <cpodonne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Great! That looks like a cleaner, more standardized solution. I was just > hacking away until the warnings stopped. So can I go ahead and #include > <inttypes.h> or should I wait until <rtems/inttypes.h> is defined before > doing any more? Does this work for printk() too? > First the easy answer. printk() supports a subset of printf() formats. So as long as it is a supported printf format, then yes. But I just looked for printk() documentation and I don't see any. The code is in cpukit/libcsupport/src/vprintk.c for a double check. It is supposed to support everything required by any test. If a file only uses C99 standard PRI constants, then use <inttypes.h> If a file needs the extra ones being collected into <rtems/inttypes.h>, then it should include that. No need to introduce an unneeded dependency. Funny, how this simple set of warnings has rippled. It also makes me want to file a ticket for printk() documentation and adding code style rules about <inttypes.h>. --joel > > Thanks Joel. > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@rtems.org > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
