| ??? 05/23/05 15:22 Modified: 05/23/05 15:23 Read: times |
#93765 - portability Responding to: ???'s previous message |
A possibly less non-portable method
1) the need to make portable code is hugely overrated for small embedded systems. 2) if you port, it will never be seamless. 3) if portablility is a concern, make some #defines in a separate module (included in all modules) such as #define UNION union and use those so that, in the unlikely case you have to port, you are pointed towards the places that need be checked/changed. 4) I find portability somewhat important in ONE case: functions that have no I/O concerns. Erik |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Unions in C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You miss the point completely... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Easy with Union | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You can see from the Raghu example... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Platform-dependence | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Padding in unions | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| portability | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| array=pointer...? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| array != pointer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Quirk of C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Read the FAQ | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Read the Comment | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Read everything | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Looks the same to me | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| This One | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| That's the problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Good example | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No fun | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Well... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Of course it does! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Hmm | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Actually, even less. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| const pointer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| O.K you win | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Please conclude | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Not Exactly | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
End of wrong stick? | 01/01/70 00:00 |