Rework build targets to mirror libraries as _headers versions, and fix dependency issues #1211

2023-01-29T13:06:51-06:00

kilograham commented

2023-01-29 13:06:51 -06:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Rework build targets such that:

Pico SDK libraries now have the correct dependencies on other SDK libraries
Pico SDK libraries all have _headers variants to include the just headers. This may facilitate building user STATIC libraries without pulling in SDK code, though care will still need to be taken w.r.t. values of #defines
Make sure the _headers versions also have the correct dependencies

Note: There are a few exceptions to 1. for some non code libraries like pico_standard_link and pico_cxx_options

Rework build targets such that: 1. Pico SDK libraries now have the correct dependencies on other SDK libraries 2. Pico SDK libraries all have _headers variants to include the just headers. This may facilitate building user STATIC libraries without pulling in SDK code, though care will still need to be taken w.r.t. values of #defines 3. Make sure the _headers versions also have the correct dependencies Note: There are a few exceptions to 1. for some non code libraries like pico_standard_link and pico_cxx_options

peterharperuk (Migrated from github.com) approved these changes

2023-01-29 14:52:10 -06:00

peterharperuk (Migrated from github.com) left a comment

Some questions, but basically looks ok

src/CMakeLists.txt

					
				@ -80,13 +119,17 @@ macro(pico_simple_hardware_headers_only_target NAME)

				        #   super interesting except to determine functionality as they are mostly passive accessors, however

You might have to explain to me what these LIB_* defs are for

src/CMakeLists.txt

Should this be hardware_structs_headers? See other examples

src/CMakeLists.txt

Should this be hardware_structs_headers?

lurch commented

2023-01-29 15:04:03 -06:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Apologies for the stupid question, but is this all "internal to pico-sdk only", i.e. it has no impact on anybody using the SDK in their projects?

Apologies for the stupid question, but is this all "internal to pico-sdk only", i.e. it has no impact on anybody _using_ the SDK in their projects?

kilograham (Migrated from github.com) reviewed

2023-01-29 16:52:47 -06:00

src/CMakeLists.txt

					
				@ -80,13 +119,17 @@ macro(pico_simple_hardware_headers_only_target NAME)

				        #   super interesting except to determine functionality as they are mostly passive accessors, however

The idea was to allow inter-dependent libraries to be aware of each other, and to change/add behavior or guard includes

so you can do

#if LIB_PICO_FOO
#include "pico/foo.h"
#endif

as well - you can search on them; they are using a lot in the stdio stuff and with some of the swapable libraries. I'm kind of leaning in favor of making these more explicit than implicit, and thus have also started adding the new NOFLAG option to avoid setting them... of course it is hard to know who has taken advantage of them, but probably few if any beyond SDK and examples/extras/playground

Note: you might think (as did I) the the LIB_ flag therefore belongs on the header, however in practice we only check them in the C files

The idea was to allow inter-dependent libraries to be aware of each other, and to change/add behavior or guard includes so you can do ``` #if LIB_PICO_FOO #include "pico/foo.h" #endif ``` as well - you can search on them; they are using a lot in the `stdio` stuff and with some of the swapable libraries. I'm kind of leaning in favor of making these more explicit than implicit, and thus have also started adding the new `NOFLAG` option to avoid setting them... of course it is hard to know who has taken advantage of them, but probably few if any beyond SDK and examples/extras/playground Note: you might think (as did I) the the LIB_ flag therefore belongs on the header, however in practice we only check them in the C files

kilograham (Migrated from github.com) reviewed

2023-01-29 16:53:13 -06:00

src/CMakeLists.txt

yeah, i almost did - the libraries are identical (i.e. it is a headers only library already)

kilograham commented

2023-01-29 16:54:08 -06:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Apologies for the stupid question, but is this all "internal to pico-sdk only", i.e. it has no impact on anybody using the SDK in their projects?

The intention is for it to have no (negative) impact

> Apologies for the stupid question, but is this all "internal to pico-sdk only", i.e. it has no impact on anybody _using_ the SDK in their projects? The intention is for it to have no (negative) impact

👍 1

peterharperuk commented

2023-01-30 10:47:13 -06:00

(Migrated from github.com)

I approve of this.

Sign in to join this conversation.

No reviewers

peterharperuk

No labels

compiler version issues

needs reporter detail

No milestone

No assignees

1 participant

Notifications

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set

Reference

gh-raspberrypi/pico-sdk!1211

				`@ -80,13 +119,17 @@ macro(pico_simple_hardware_headers_only_target NAME)`
				`# super interesting except to determine functionality as they are mostly passive accessors, however`

Rows
Columns