I rarely ask questions on this forum, but since I couldn't [easily] find it in the help-files, or on-line, I'm asking you guys.
I usually (like never) don't use the 'reentrant' pragma, but I think I may have to do that with a particular routine.
BUT I can't find the key-word that declares a function as reentrant. Am I missing something? Is there one for Keil's IDE tools? If so, what is its form? Can I get a link to the 'official' use of it?
Thanks in advance, and I need it asap because I need to pass this class and I don't want to really learn how to do this 'embedded' stuff anyway but the teacher keeps hounding me.
--Cpt. Vince Foster 2nd Cannon Place Fort Marcy Park, VA
Are you still left with the impression that the world works the same as they told you at school?
Oh no, not at all. My impression was, though, that someone with 30 years experience would not think that re-entrancy was a compiler directive rather than a general concept. The CS101 reference served just to highlight the clueless question.
"The CS101 reference served just to highlight the clueless question."
On the contrary, I would say that the information in that link does not give any information at all about the behaviour of any other compiler or any other processor.
But the link does indicate that there may be a reason to take a closer look at the behaviour of Keils other compilers. But as we all (should) know: The information you have not found is not proof that the information isn't available - just that you haven't managed to find any information yet.
The general-purpose stack of the ARM makes it very unlikely that Keil has any #pragma or keyword intended for compilation of recursive - or non-recursive - functions. But the word "unlikely" does represent an uncertainty. Sometimes, you may not be happy with just being 99.99% convinced about something.
I thought it was common knowledge to be "better safe than sorry", or to "better ask one question too much". I guess you prefer to assume and let the time tell if you were correct.
Especially with the kind of projects the good Captain works on...!!
=:0
I thought it was common knowledge to be "better safe than sorry", or to "better ask one question too much".
Indeed, but the assumption implicit in the question was that there must be some mechanism to switch on reentrancy rather than it being a natural result of the calling convention.
I guess you prefer to assume and let the time tell if you were correct.
Not at all. I just prefer to engage my brain.