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
"I think that would work only if you had a spell-checker that could be confined to comments & strings?"
The text editors we use have that ability (with the help of some custom macros).
Spelling Issues:
I once worked on a commercial product and wrote the configuration interface for the DOS user (Pre-Windows), and I had to deal with the cursor, and had routines labeled 'cursor' and 'curser' (they did different things) in my code.
In my "Help Files" I misspelled cursor a lot. This was back in the pre-email days, so I got lots and lots of letters and phone calls about MY poor spelling.
Needless to say, it was embarrassing.
Basically, all 'help files' (or any text the user will read) should be spell-checked using an editor that has that capability, along with with grammar checking.
Then these files should be peer reviewed before it is incorporated into the source code.
In addition it is clear that the function names should not look so close to each other either. (Yes, more 'rules').
That is necessary, but not sufficient.
It is a very common failing of so-called "user" documentation that it is written by people who are intimately familiar with the product - this is, usually, just what the user does not require!
What the user reading the documentation requires is stuff that is accessible to someone who does not already know the product!
The author and his/her peers are probably too familiar with the product - so you also need a proof-reader who can take a user-eye view...