This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Reentrant?

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

Parents

  • Robert McNamara -> The ARM calling convention, as defined does not require

    Cpt. Vince -> The use of 'Reentrancy' is is specially identified in my rule-book as a cautionary issue.

    Jack Sprat -> 'Reentrant' implies rather more than 'recursive'.

    Cpt. Vince -> The architecture of my software allows non-standard pragmas to be issolated and documented well so that ten years from now (or more) the code can be updated, recompiled, rebuilt and still perform AND PASS the required testing.

    =>allows non-standard pragmas to be issolated and documented well<=

    Sorry for that, I am confused.

    non-standard to ARM calling convention?
    or
    non-standard to C standard?

    Is the use of 'recursive' also specially identified in the rule-book as a cautionary issue?

    I am not sure if I am capable to understand all these, but I guess I should catch this opportunity.

Reply

  • Robert McNamara -> The ARM calling convention, as defined does not require

    Cpt. Vince -> The use of 'Reentrancy' is is specially identified in my rule-book as a cautionary issue.

    Jack Sprat -> 'Reentrant' implies rather more than 'recursive'.

    Cpt. Vince -> The architecture of my software allows non-standard pragmas to be issolated and documented well so that ten years from now (or more) the code can be updated, recompiled, rebuilt and still perform AND PASS the required testing.

    =>allows non-standard pragmas to be issolated and documented well<=

    Sorry for that, I am confused.

    non-standard to ARM calling convention?
    or
    non-standard to C standard?

    Is the use of 'recursive' also specially identified in the rule-book as a cautionary issue?

    I am not sure if I am capable to understand all these, but I guess I should catch this opportunity.

Children
No data