topic Re: static volatile in Kinetis Design Studio

static volatile

neilporven — Tue, 18 Apr 2017 01:36:17 GMT

Hi everyone,

I am converting some code that was done for a TI MSP430 to a Kinetis part. When

I compile the code, it is complaining about this variable, saying that it is unknown type name.

static volatile tTRF797x_Status g_sTrfStatus;

Is this declared incorrectly?

Is there a document that explains all the legal types in the Kinetis IDE?

Thank you,

Neil

Re: static volatile

BlackNight — Tue, 18 Apr 2017 05:35:19 GMT

Hi Neil,

I think the reason is that the compiler does not see the declaration of tTRF797x_Status. Make sure it is declared before usinig it, probably you missed to include the header file for it?

I hope this helps,

Erich

Re: static volatile

neilporven — Sat, 22 Apr 2017 17:36:12 GMT

Hi Erich,

After going back and forward with support from TI, they said that tTRF797x_Status was declared in say

File2.h like so:

typedef enum

{

TRF_IDLE,

TX_COMPLETE,

RX_COMPLETE,

TX_ERROR,

RX_WAIT,

RX_WAIT_EXTENSION,

TX_WAIT,

PROTOCOL_ERROR,

COLLISION_ERROR,

NO_RESPONSE_RECEIVED,

NO_RESPONSE_RECEIVED_15693

}tTrfStatus;

What was strange is that I expect to see this line somewhere in this .h file

extern tTRF797x_Status tTrfStatus; <----- which is not there?

also I expected to see this in the File2.c

tTRF797x_Status tTrfStatus; <----- which is not there?

and finally in File1.h the following:

#include "File2.h" <---- This is present

so that you can the make the following declaration in File1.c

static volatile tTRF797x_Status g_sTrfStatus; <------ This is what the compiler is having an issue with

Am I missing anything here?

Thanks,

Neil

Re: static volatile

BlackNight — Sat, 22 Apr 2017 17:59:00 GMT

Hi Neil,

you write:

>>extern tTRF797x_Status tTrfStatus; <----- which is not there?

which does not make any sense. I rater would expect

extern tTrfStatus tTRF797x_Status;

and instead of

>>tTRF797x_Status tTrfStatus; <----- which is not there?

it should be

tTrfStatus tTRF797x_Status;

According the information you have provided, the tTrfStatus is an enumeration type.

Therefore your

>>static volatile tTRF797x_Status g_sTrfStatus;

should be writen as

static volatile g_sTrfStatus tTRF797x_Status;

I don't know how good you are at C programming or if this is just an oversight on your side, but in C you have to specify first the type and then the variable name, e.g. as in

static volatile int myVariable;

I hope this helps,

Erich

Re: static volatile

neilporven — Sat, 22 Apr 2017 22:30:25 GMT

Hi Erich,

I am trying to understand code that was done by a software engineer from TI.

Yes, the static volatile tTRF797x_Status g_sTrfStatus is an oversight by me, I should have picked

up on this. I will change it, but I don't understand how this could be compiling on there side. I imagine

TI's compiler should had recognize the above as error and they should have run into this issue.

Thanks,

Neil

Re: static volatile

bobpaddock — Mon, 24 Apr 2017 12:42:23 GMT

Some of the TI compilers are not the best.

The first one simply ignored 'volatile', which shows how bad they were.

The people writing it were compiler writers with no embedded experience.

A typedef defines no space, there is no reason for an extern after it.