Possible argp implementation questions regarding the use of <stdio.h>
Ignacio Vargas
ignacio.vargas@rapidsilicon.com
Thu Feb 2 21:41:48 GMT 2023
As I mentioned when I e-mailed from outside the mailing list a while
ago, I'm working on an very stripped down argp baremetal implementation
that I would like to contribute to newlib at some point. As Corinna
pointed out I don't want it to be GPLed so I've been writing an
implementation from scratch that doesn't even depend on getopt.
I have a question regarding the use (or lack thereof) of <stdio.h>.
Context: For the target we support we can't use newlib's printing
functions because we can't provide an implementation of all the required
OS subroutines. This is due to working on a very limited target. This is
all to say, our stripped down argp can't include <stdio.h>, and in the
future I would like to contribute it to newlib in a way that doesn't
require including <stdio.h>.
Question: From what I've been told by colleagues, newlib aims to be a
very "drop-in" replacement for a regular stdlib. So I'm asking if it
would be an issue to contribute my argp version that:
1. Already deviates from glibc's in the fact that it's a stripped-down
version that doesn't implement all the features. And also deviates in
small ways in certain features it does support.
2. Has an additional mechanism for the user to specify which printing
function to use, instead of just including <stdio.h> and using the
provided printing functions. With the goal of having wider support
across baremetal targets.
Best regards,
Ignacio Vargas
More information about the Newlib
mailing list