LeafLabs Garden

A place to share, learn, and grow...

1. 

   Anonymous
   Unregistered

   Hello all.

   in order to adapt some of the Arduino libraries for the Maple I need to identify what the Board used.

   In avr-gcc there are some macros that do this for example:

   __AVR_ATmega328, AVR_ATmega2560, __ AVR__, and _BOARD_UNO_ _BOARD_MEGA_

   Can not find the equivalent macros MAPLE, something that can tell me __ ARM__, _BOARD_MAPLE, I have found a macro that I could say STM32_MCU_SERIES (comparing it equals STM32_SERIES_F1 _F2 OR ...) but does not believe is what I want.

   Where can I find information for it.

   Grateful for any guidance

   Posted 3 years ago #
2. 

   feurig
   Member

   The last word I got when I asked this question was to use the board defines. The STM_32MCU_SERIES is what made more sense to me since it covers all of the existing leaflabs boards and boards like the olimexino. It would be nice if there were a __LIBMAPLE__ macro and a __LIBMAPLE_VERSION__ version so we could behave appropriately. They are probably putting this off until the wiring merge.

   Posted 3 years ago #
3. 

   Anonymous
   Unregistered

   @feurig

   I think it's cool!

   However, I do not know there is a restriction of the Maple project to other ARM processors, if no restrictions, it is interesting that the macro is changed from STM_32MCU_SERIES to MCU_SERIES, allowing ARMs from other manufacturers.

   Posted 3 years ago #
4. 

   mbolivar
   LeafLabs

   __LIBMAPLE__ macro and a __LIBMAPLE_VERSION__ version so we could behave appropriately.

   agree. care to submit a patch? i think the linux kernel uses some git-fu to make this all work out even for development versions.

   STM_32MCU_SERIES to MCU_SERIES, allowing ARMs from other manufacturers.

   disagree. i'd rather have something like a LIBMAPLE_MCU_MANUFACTURER, taking values like LIBMAPLE_MCU_MANUFACTURER_ST, etc., so that you could organize the conditional compilation in a tree.

   Posted 3 years ago #
5. 

   feurig
   Member

   Mbolivar. Didnt see the patch request. I will put this on my todo list.

   Posted 3 years ago #
6. 

   mbolivar
   LeafLabs

   Thanks!

   I think something like git describe might be of use here. (Or git describe --tags for now, as I didn't use signed tags for v0.0.10-v0.0.12. I will use a signed tag for the next release.)

   Posted 3 years ago #
7. 

   feurig
   Member

   mbolivar,

   This is getting more important as the new include style is breaking the libraries that we are trying to port to both the ide and libmaple. (crenn and I are trying to work on the maple-sdfat libary and are running into this already).

   I will try to figure out an approach.

   ps. why don't you ever hang in the channel any more :)

   Don.

   Posted 3 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.