Forum

    Discussion regarding the Eiffel programming language and various supporting tools.
  • Aug 13
    RE: [eiffel-users] Re: Conditional compilation
    Taking a page from the vision library, having implementation subsets works quite well. Eiffel Vision offers different implementation flavors for different toolkits, keeping the "interface" classes common. It works for other characteristics that might otherwise be addressed with preprocessor
  • Aug 13
    Re: Conditional compilation
    Alternate approach depending on the problem: Use the GROUPS tree structure in the editor to place complete code classes into different subtrees for each usage case, then use the EiffelStudio project settings and structure with target definitions. Then compile the class selection of choice as a
  • Aug 13
    Re: Conditional compilation
    My approach to this is to create a configurator class of manifest constants only, then use them within the main code to bracket selective code choices. The compiler willl use dead code removal on the final product to drop unused sections of code. Of course the excluded parts must remain valid
  • Aug 08
    Bad metrics history saving policy
    The metrics history of a project is saved at .\EIFGENs\\Data\metrics\history.xml. But it seems that it is saved only when the project is closed. Why not whenever completing a recalculation issued by clicking "Recalculate selected metric(s)" button? Or am I missing something? Thanks in
  • Aug 08
    Conditional compilation
    At projects settings, EiffelStudio has several options governed by conditions. I'd like to know if it is possible to set up conditional compilation at source code level, like e.g. #ifdef used in C/C++. Thanks in advance.
  • Aug 03
    Re: [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    Yes—I am seeing now that I can "inline" everything and then do all the heavy-lift work in the "alias" clause. Thank you!
  • Aug 03
    Re: [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    Hi Larry, I am not sure that I understand the question, but yes, you can use "inline" in C++ like you do in C. Louis M On 2020-08-03 8:45 a.m., Larry Rix wrote: Hi Louis! Can I use the "inline" as-is with C++ calls? I suppose I could try to look that up on the Eiffel support site, but you
  • Aug 03
    Re: [eiffel-users] C/C++ "inline" external calls
    In fact, I do not put the return. If the Eiffel compiler see a return type in Eiffel (here, it is INTEGER), it does manage a Result variable that is returned.So, in your code, I would just put: digitalRead (a_wpi_pin_number: INTEGER): INTEGER -- Read hi-lo value of
  • Aug 03
    Re: C/C++ "inline" external calls
    WOW—I am really just that blind! I forgot the "inline" keyword in the manifest string for "external"!!!
  • Aug 03
    C/C++ "inline" external calls
    Hi All, Louis (and others) have put me on the scent of using "inline" instead of "signature" as a defacto solution to wrapping external C and C++ calls. I was doing fine until I got a a wiringPi external call that returns a Result. digitalRead (a_wpi_pin_number: INTEGER): INTEGER -- Read
  • Aug 03
    Re: [EXT] [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    Thank you, Rosivaldo!
  • Aug 03
    Re: [EXT] [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    Hi Larry, Maybe you can take a look at https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-10.2.0/gcc/Invoking-G_002b_002b.html#Invoking-G_002b_002b. It's a short description on the difference of gcc and g++ for compiling C++ code. Best regards, Rosivaldo. Em 03/08/2020 09:35, Larry Rix escreveu: >
  • Aug 03
    Re: [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    Hi Louis! Can I use the "inline" as-is with C++ calls? I suppose I could try to look that up on the Eiffel support site, but you might be able to answer better and faster. Thank you! Larry
  • Aug 03
    Re: [EXT] [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    Thanks, Ulrich. I will give it a look. On Monday, August 3, 2020 at 1:50:09 AM UTC-4 Ulrich W. wrote: > >>> Larry Rix schrieb am 31.07.2020 um > 14:32 in > Nachricht <35501688-0d6c-4528...@googlegroups.com>: > > I am now getting comfy with gcc, but the Freenove
  • Aug 03
    Re: [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    Excellent feedback, Louis! Thank you! On Sunday, August 2, 2020 at 10:46:49 AM UTC-4 eif...@tioui.com wrote: > Hi Larry, > > With the "signature" version, you specify the C type in the external > section while in the inline version, you have to specify everything in the > "alias" section.
  • Aug 03
    Antw: [EXT] [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    Nachricht <35501688-0d6c-4528-a374-f361cbed1d67n@googlegroups.com>: > I am now getting comfy with gcc, but the Freenove sample code has C++ code > that it wants to me to compile with g++ rather than gcc. > > QUESTION: If I put a C++ external wrapper into my Eiffel code, is the > Eiffel
  • Aug 02
    Re: [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    Hi Larry, With the "signature" version, you specify the C type in the external section while in the inline version, you have to specify everything in the "alias" section. "inline" is more powerful than "signature" and everything that can be done with the "signature" version can be translated
  • Aug 02
    Re: [eiffel-users] Raspberry Pi 4 GPIO
    Actually for me it would be that simple, a compilation of my project on a rpi takes 58 minutes.... on a computer it would take so much less time.... On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 6:28 PM 'Louis M' via Eiffel Users < eiffel...@googlegroups.com> wrote: > Yes! > > Louis M > On 2020-07-28 6:56 a.m., Larry
  • Aug 02
    Re: [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    Hey Louis! Isn't the "signature" the indicator to the compiler of an external call to external code, whereas "inline" indicates the C/C++ code is fully contained in the feature body? Kindest regards, Larry On Sunday, August 2, 2020 at 1:22:50 AM UTC-4 eif...@tioui.com wrote: > On 2020-08-01
  • Aug 02
    Re: [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    That is OK. Then: "C++ signature ..." instead of: "C signature ..." Unless I am mistaken, both are valid and present (not obsolete) Eiffel syntax (see: https://www.eiffel.org/doc/solutions/Interfacing_with_C_and_C%2B%2B ). Good day, Louis M
  • Aug 01
    Re: [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    BTW—I do realize that my use of "alias" is redundant because my Eiffel feature name is precisely the same (case insensitive) as the C feature name, which negates the need for the "alias" clause. I do this only for a future case where I might decide to do a rename of the feature into something
  • Aug 01
    Re: [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    So far, my C externals have looked like this: On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 6:34:51 PM UTC-4 eif...@tioui.com wrote: > I do not know if it is important, but when you use C++ instead of C in > external, I have to use: > > "C++ inline" > > instead of: > > "C inline" > > Like this: > > frozen
  • Aug 01
    Re: [eiffel-users] Re: google sheets
    Or Gitlab. It does not belong to Microsoft and is open source. Louis M
  • Aug 01
    Re: [eiffel-users] GCC vs G++
    I do not know if it is important, but when you use C++ instead of C in external, I have to use: "C++ inline" instead of: "C inline" Like this: frozen ObjectA_new:POINTER -- C initialisation of a ObjectA external "C++ inline use " alias
  • Aug 01
    Re: [eiffel-users] Raspberry Pi 4 GPIO
    Yes! Louis M On 2020-07-28 6:56 a.m., Larry Rix wrote: Oh, I see! I think I was missing some information in your first message. It is now clear that by cross-compiler, you mean that you have a compiler that runs on my PC (Intel CPU), but compiles for ARM7/8? Therefore, I can do quicker compiles
  • See more ...