We are running a survey to help us improve the experience for all of our members. If you see the survey appear, please take the time to tell us about your experience if you can.
I had searched in the Discussion Forum for the whole moring but I couldn't find the right way to solve the problem I met,so I send this message hoping you guys can help me!Thanks in advance:-)My problem is as follows: 1.I want to define a macro,which is similar like function.It will be used in my communction interrupt service routine(so you can see that why I don't choose to call a function to realize it) 2.here's the definition of this macro: #define Macro_TestRxEnd(sbit Header_flag,uchar Header,uchar Tailer) \ { \ Return_flag = 0; \ if (!Header_flag) \ { \ if (Rxbuf == Header) \ { \ Header_flag = 1; \ ptRxBuf++; \ } \ else \ { ptRxBuf = xBuf; } \ else \ { \ if (Rxbuf == Tailer) \ { Return_flag = 1; } \ } 3.then the compile result is : Error C304: Bad Macro Parameter List so can anyone help me find out the right way to define such a long macro? I'm waiting for your good ideas earnestly!
"If you call a function from an ISR and from elsewhere in the code you have to make it reentrant." OK - back with you now! Yes, that's true. However, it looks to me like this bit of code should be used in the ISR only (recognising the start/end of a packet in the data stream?) - in which case there's no particular problem with having it in a function (other than the call overhead, which I don't think should be too significant in this case?) Having said that, if I am right, I don't see the point in using either a function or a macro - I don't see why it shouldn't just go verbatim straight in the ISR. Maybe the OP could enlighten us...?
"However, it looks to me like this bit of code should be used in the ISR only" Quite possibly, I had just assumed the reason for making is a macro was to avoid the very popular 'multiple call to segment' warning and all its associated hazards.