Hi Everyone !
Let me tell you more about my project, this is an circuit system that receives data from temperature sensor show it to 4digit 7-segment display, respond by buzzer . For heating up-down 6 push button key is used. Looking at the algorithm, I have use GPIO interrupt, SPI, timer etc choosing from cubemx. At it has several states, so we use state-machine,utilities and user driver those are very useful during operation. All system is helping on HAL driver, CMSIS, global c and h files and this comdef.h
I am using ARMCC and target option and including paths, all followed from example cubemx project, from install pack I have updated all.
I am getting following errors.
\states\main_state.h(22): error: #5: cannot open source input file "comdef.h": No such file or directory
Usually it comes with Visual C++, I am not sure why my project is not supporting this file in KEIL.
This code was build in Coo-cox environment, I have modified some of its part after changing its main MCU pin-out in cubemx.
2. What I have modified is, its tim.h. spi.h, gpio.h, files combine in one main.c file. Remove I2C h file. some time I did #include #define.
3. Make changes in mxconstant.h file, as we changes GPIO in cubemx,
4. I think, HAL files some how conflicts in for minor changes.
5. Somehow, state files cannot recognized by HAL drivers. Take a look here, http://www.keil.com/support/docs/1868.htm 6. Problem to include header reference, http://www.keil.com/forum/3775/
Kindly, tell me more possible reason thus I can work for that.
Just a footnote - the MinGW compiler is intended to create Windows binaries. So the comdef.h file is intended for programs using the COM model for interfacing.
Unless the OP did copy code from a Windows program, the missing comdef.h is most probably a file with a completely different purpose. Possibly a file describing UART functionality for some microcontroller or some microcontroller library. Something the OP should verify by looking at the comdef.h file available in the original build environment - and has been recommended to do since this thread was originally created.
I would have thought Public Domain means "Everyone uses it, but no one knows where and when it comes from". Now I think Public Domain means "The author intentionally puts it into Public Domain".
Public Domain is better than Apache, BSD or license?
Public Domain is better than Apache, BSD or MIT license? (missed)
Public Domain is good. The biggest problem is that many PD files have no original information showing that the person who put the code into the Public Domain had the rights to do so.
One problem with that, is that evil companies can pick up the code and glue on their own license and try to make it their own - and later try to blackmail other users. Then it's the other uses who needs to prove that the source code was available in the PD (and rightfully so) long before the claims of the company. And if the only original text is "This code is put into the public domain", then that task can be very hard.
Apache, BSD or MIT are very good. And with a maintained copyright and license file, you get traceability on the origins, making it harder for other people/companies to try to appropriate the ownership of the code.