On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 8:54 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote:
> On 29/09/2020 15:47, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > > On 29/09/2020 15:42, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 8:37 AM Sebastian Huber > >> <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de > >> <mailto:sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de>> wrote: > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> I work currently on the documentation of the IO Manager. What is the > >> purpose of > >> > >> typedef rtems_status_code rtems_device_driver; > >> > >> ? > >> > >> For me this looks a bit like camouflage. > >> > >> > >> No. It is a use of typedef to make the purpose of the method clear. > >> > >> You have nibbled at these for years. There were at least types for > >> Classic Tasks, ASRs, and TSRs at one point. > > Yes, the typedefs to void. > >> > >> If this is the last one, I'm not going to fight it. This isn't the > >> hill I am > >> going to die on. > > I am not suggesting to remove them although I find these typedefs > > pretty odd. I just look for some documentation text. > > What about this: > > /** > * @ingroup RTEMSAPIClassicIO > * > * @brief This type shall be used in device driver entry declarations and > * definitions. > * > * Device driver entries return an #rtems_status_code status code. This > type > * definition helps to document device driver entries in the source code. > */ > typedef rtems_status_code rtems_device_driver; > That's more than sufficient. Thanks.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
