• State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Subscribers 21 subscribers
  • Views 3858 views
  • Users 0 members are here
2025 survey

We are running a survey to help us improve the experience for all of our members. If you see the survey appear, please take the time to tell us about your experience if you can.

Options
Related
How was your experience today?
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

Error in Configuration Wizard parser

Alex M

This is an example from www.keil.com/.../configWizard.html

//   <o TIMESTAMP_SRC>Time Stamp Source
//      <dwt=>     DWT Cycle Counter
//      <systick=> SysTick
//      <user=>    User Timer
//   Selects source for 32-bit time stamp
#define TIMESTAMP_SRC  systick

Try inserting a digit into both instances of "TIMESTAMP_SRC", for example "TIMESTAMP2_SRC" and the parser will fail with
"Syntax error in Options Block - line xxx:
Invalid numeric number."
Pregrammers very frequently use #defined values with digits and this is a severe limitation.

Parents
  • 0 in reply to Alex M

    Allowing labels to have numbers may be convenient, but it would introduce the potential for users accidentally triggering options.

    Numbers in labels are already used 2 major ways. The first skip counting would easily become a headache

    skip:
    <qi>;
    <oi>; <oi.x>;
    <si>; <si.x>

    This will skip i items. Can be applied to all annotation items marked with a * in this table.

    -----
    Modify a bit:
    <e.i>*
    <o.i>
    <s.i>*

    These will modify a particular bit of a value

    ------

    I know in your example you hid the number in the middle of a string, but it would be very easy to accidentally put the number at the end of a string, with unintended consequences.

    ---

    If you have any suggestions for the Standard, The CMSIS group it an industry wide community. You could leave ideas at github.com/.../CMSIS_5

Reply
  • 0 in reply to Alex M

    Allowing labels to have numbers may be convenient, but it would introduce the potential for users accidentally triggering options.

    Numbers in labels are already used 2 major ways. The first skip counting would easily become a headache

    skip:
    <qi>;
    <oi>; <oi.x>;
    <si>; <si.x>

    This will skip i items. Can be applied to all annotation items marked with a * in this table.

    -----
    Modify a bit:
    <e.i>*
    <o.i>
    <s.i>*

    These will modify a particular bit of a value

    ------

    I know in your example you hid the number in the middle of a string, but it would be very easy to accidentally put the number at the end of a string, with unintended consequences.

    ---

    If you have any suggestions for the Standard, The CMSIS group it an industry wide community. You could leave ideas at github.com/.../CMSIS_5

Children
No data