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

Is there a way to make the C51 compiler use memory-specific pointers by default?

Is there a way to make the C51 compiler use xdata memory-specific pointers as
the default instead of generic pointers?

C source code that could otherwise be portable to other platforms has to have
xdata keywords sprinkled all over the place. Thereby making the source code
no longer portable.

Assume the following example code:

// Forward reference
typedef struct request_block req_t;

// A hypothetical request block
struct request_block
{
   int     cmd;
   int     parm1;
   int     parm2;
   int     result;
   req_t*  next;
};

void add_request(req_t* new_request);

The above code is very portable, but results in generic pointers which is too
costly in terms of code space. I really need to use memory-specific pointers.

To be sure I can do the following with macros to solve the portability issue,
but I still need to sprinkle my macros everywhere. In fact this is the solution
I am currently using, but it is a pain.

#ifdef __C51__
#  define XDATA  xdata
#else
#  define XDATA
#endif

// Forward reference
typedef struct request_block req_t;

// A hypothetical request block
struct request_block
{
   int           cmd;
   int           parm1;
   int           parm2;
   int           result;
   req_t XDATA*  next;
};

void add_request(req_t XDATA* new_request);

If I could specify a compiler pragma or even better a compiler option switch
that told the C51 compiler to use "xdata" as the default for all naked pointer
declarations then I could use my original example without any xdata keywords
or macros sprinkled all over the place. BTW, my example only shows one pointer
type being declared. Imagine this issue duplicated to dozens of other pointer
types and I think you will see why I consider this macro solution a real pain.

I realize I would be giving up access to any Keil provided function that uses
generic pointers, but that is not an issue for me since I am implementing all
the supporting functions myself.

Even more awesome would be a "generic" keyword along with the compiler option
to pick the default pointer type for naked pointer declarations and use the
"generic" keyword when needed to explicitly choose generic pointer types.

Parents Reply Children