diff --git a/TODO b/TODO index 028dca512e..256f676890 100644 --- a/TODO +++ b/TODO @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -NuttX TODO List (Last updated September 28, 2011) +NuttX TODO List (Last updated October 3, 2011) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This file summarizes known NuttX bugs, limitations, inconsistencies with @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ nuttx/ (1) Memory Managment (mm/) (2) Signals (sched/, arch/) (1) pthreads (sched/) - (1) C++ Support + (2) C++ Support (5) Binary loaders (binfmt/) (16) Network (net/, drivers/net) (2) USB (drivers/usbdev, drivers/usbhost) @@ -153,6 +153,21 @@ o pthreads (sched/) o C++ Support ^^^^^^^^^^^ + Description: The argument of the 'new' operators should take a type of + size_t (see libxx/libxx_new.cxx and libxx/libxx_newa.cxx). But + size_t has an unknown underlying. In the nuttx sys/types.h + header file, size_t is typed as uint32_t (which is determined by + architecture-specific logic). But the C++ compiler may believe + that size_t is of a different type resulting in compilation errors + in the operator. Using the underlying integer type Instead of + size_t seems to resolve the compilation issues. + Status: Kind of open. There is a workaround. Setting CONFIG_CXX_NEWLONG=y + will define the operators with argument of type unsigned long; + Setting CONFIG_CXX_NEWLONG=n will define the operators with argument + of type unsigned int. But this is pretty ugly! A better solution + would be to get ahold of the compilers definition of size_t. + Priority: Low. + Description: Need to call static constructors Status: Open Priority: Low, depends on toolchain. Call to gcc's built-in static diff --git a/libxx/libxx_new.cxx b/libxx/libxx_new.cxx index 49caf74f38..8ec725ca8b 100755 --- a/libxx/libxx_new.cxx +++ b/libxx/libxx_new.cxx @@ -58,14 +58,22 @@ // Name: new // // NOTE: -// This should take a type of size_t, which for ARM GCC is unsigned long. -// but size_t may actually be a different different type, in sys/include.h, -// it is typed as uint32_t. Need to REVISIT this. +// This should take a type of size_t. But size_t has an unknown underlying +// type. In the nuttx sys/types.h header file, size_t is typed as uint32_t +// (which is determined by architecture-specific logic). But the C++ +// compiler may believe that size_t is of a different type resulting in +// compilation errors in the operator. Using the underlying integer type +// instead of size_t seems to resolve the compilation issues. Need to +// REVISIT this. // //*************************************************************************** //void *operator new(size_t nbytes) +#ifdef CONFIG_CXX_NEWLONG void *operator new(unsigned long nbytes) +#else +void *operator new(unsigned int nbytes) +#endif { // We have to allocate something diff --git a/libxx/libxx_newa.cxx b/libxx/libxx_newa.cxx index e8c214d4d1..855160c412 100755 --- a/libxx/libxx_newa.cxx +++ b/libxx/libxx_newa.cxx @@ -58,18 +58,26 @@ // Name: new // // NOTE: -// This should take a type of size_t, which for ARM GCC is unsigned long. -// but size_t may actually be a different different type, in sys/include.h, -// it is typed as uint32_t. Need to REVISIT this. +// This should take a type of size_t. But size_t has an unknown underlying +// type. In the nuttx sys/types.h header file, size_t is typed as uint32_t +// (which is determined by architecture-specific logic). But the C++ +// compiler may believe that size_t is of a different type resulting in +// compilation errors in the operator. Using the underlying integer type +// instead of size_t seems to resolve the compilation issues. Need to +// REVISIT this. // //*************************************************************************** //void *operator new[](size_t size) +#ifdef CONFIG_CXX_NEWLONG void *operator new[](unsigned long nbytes) +#else +void *operator new[](unsigned int nbytes) +#endif { // We have to allocate something - if (nbytes< 1) + if (nbytes < 1) { nbytes = 1; }