[ECOS] kernel API
Thu Apr 24 09:15:00 GMT 2003
Jonathan Larmour <jifl@eCosCentric.com> writes:
> Sergei Organov wrote:
> > Nick Garnett <nickg@eCosCentric.com> writes:
> >>Sergei Organov <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > [...]
> >>>Besides, the C++ stuff has a rather boring deficiency. I do use C++ stuff
> >>>directly (through my own C++ wrappers), but I still can't find any
> >>>reasonable answer to the question why condvars and mutexes have been put
> >>>into the same header 'mutex.hxx'. I don't think anybody would expect to
> >>>find a 'ConditionVariable' class in a 'mutex' header ;)
> >>The implementations are in the same file, so they also share a header.
> > IMHO that's also a mistake though I don't care much where implementations
> > are.
> > I don't like the situation when all source files that use mutexes but don't
> > use condvars are polluted with the condvars declarations.
> I think you mean it might be a mistake if it was an official API ;-P.
I definitely meant it's a mistake by itself though its significance is
proportional to the number of source files that use mutexes but no condvars.
It's indeed not a big deal unless it's not an official API, so I mentioned
it in this particular thread.
> Although "polluted" is overstating it anyway.
Probably. English is not my mother's language so I may choose wrong terms
sometimes, sorry. In fact I meant I don't like unnecessary compile-time
> Namespacing is something unfortunately eCos has been very very lax about.
> Just try and declare "int interrupt_end;" in any application at least!
I use interruptEnd (sometimes referred to as "camel") naming convention that
doesn't interfere with most of libraries ;) though I thought eCos has been very
careful about adding cyg_/CYG_ prefix everywhere.
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss
More information about the Ecos-discuss