Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Exporters and toolchains - flags to be shared #1671

Closed
0xc0170 opened this issue Apr 15, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

Exporters and toolchains - flags to be shared #1671

0xc0170 opened this issue Apr 15, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Apr 15, 2016

Toolchain scripts have defined flags internal in the methods (mostly init). Therefore exporters ducplicate some but not all.

As an example for uvision (ARM) the flash size reported in the online IDE for BLE Thermometer (mkit target) is around 28k flash, exported to uvision - 48k flash.

For ARM class, in the __init__:

        main_cc = join(ARM_BIN, "armcc")
        common = ["-c",
            "--cpu=%s" % cpu, "--gnu",
            "-Otime", "--split_sections", "--apcs=interwork",
            "--brief_diagnostics", "--restrict", "--multibyte_chars"
        ]

In the uvision template, --restrict --multibyte_chars -Otime --split_sections flags are not set. This should be unified.

I imagine a toolchain class have methods: get_common_flags, get_c_flags, get_ccp_flags, and get_ld_flags.

@theotherjimmy theotherjimmy self-assigned this Jun 7, 2016
@theotherjimmy
Copy link
Contributor

I'll be using properties instead of getters, but the idea is the same. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6618002/python-property-versus-getters-and-setters

@theotherjimmy
Copy link
Contributor

#1911 is merged so this is done then? @0xc0170

@ciarmcom
Copy link
Member

ciarmcom commented Aug 1, 2016

ARM Internal Ref: IOTMORF-203

@sg- sg- removed the mirrored label Aug 12, 2016
@theotherjimmy
Copy link
Contributor

This has been done a long time ago, lets get this closed out @sg-

@sg- sg- closed this as completed Sep 9, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants