Hi all.
I know it's possible to declare a variable 'read-only' by using 'const'.
When working with microcontrollers (small ICs, which often requires you to
write your code at driver-level), you need to be able to declare a structure
member 'read-only', 'write-only' or 'read+write'.
In addition
Hi Martin (and everyone else on the gcc list).
I appreciate your input and kind reply to my proposal. :)
On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 20:44:35 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> This sounds reasonable and useful to me but to be fully integrated
> into the language, attribute not_readable would need to be elevat
Hi Florian.
On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 15:21:27 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> So I'd like to propose the following two attributes, which is 'off'
>> by default (eg. read access + write access):
>> __attribute__((not_readable))
>> __attribute__((not_writable))
>
> You can already do this:
>
> “
> int
Hi Martin (and all other list members).
On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 09:04:10 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 08/31/2016 04:56 AM, Jens Bauer wrote:
>>>__attribute__ ((not_readable)) int write_only;
>>>int *preadwrite = &write_only;
>>
>> Would it not be poss
Hi all.
I'm trying to build GCC 4.8.3 with ObjC support for ARM Cortex-M4.
I had this working with an earlier version of GCC (I think it was GCC 4.5).
-But now I get build errors.
It seems to me that it's required to add the --enable-libobjc switch (otherwise
I the build stops when it can't find
I'm using a GCC toolchain similar to Yagarto for making code for the LPC1768
microcontroller.
My gcc is version 4.7.2, my binutils is version 2.23.1
To make parts of my code run faster (a timer interrupt to be exact), I've used
a modified linker script, so that I get a '.fastcode' section.
The
Hi Andrew.
Thank you, I will. Of course; I'm just a bit absent at the moment. ;)
In fact, I'm sure this must be a linker problem.
Love
Jens
On Tue, 07 May 2013 09:47:34 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 05/07/2013 08:18 AM, Jens Bauer wrote:
>> Please let me know if I n
Hi list.
I think I've found a bug in where gcc checks if array indices are in range.
Here's my test-code:
---8<-8<-8<-
/*
* file: elementTest.c
* command-line:
* arm-none-eabi-gcc -O2 elementTest.c -o elementTest
*/
#include
uint8_t eightMembers[8];
int main(int argc, const
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 22:12:51 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> In both cases you cannot actually use the memory at *p. I think gcc is
> detecting the indexing but not the access.
That makes sense!
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 23:19:45 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> It is not a bug, the warning isn't guaranteed
