The STATIC macro was introduced a very long time ago in commit
d5df6cd44a. The original reason for this was
to have the option to define it to nothing so that all static functions
become global functions and therefore visible to certain debug tools, so
one could do function size comparison and other things.
This STATIC feature is rarely (if ever) used. And with the use of LTO and
heavy inline optimisation, analysing the size of individual functions when
they are not static is not a good representation of the size of code when
fully optimised.
So the macro does not have much use and it's simpler to just remove it.
Then you know exactly what it's doing. For example, newcomers don't have
to learn what the STATIC macro is and why it exists. Reading the code is
also less "loud" with a lowercase static.
One other minor point in favour of removing it, is that it stops bugs with
`STATIC inline`, which should always be `static inline`.
Methodology for this commit was:
1) git ls-files | egrep '\.[ch]$' | \
xargs sed -Ei "s/(^| )STATIC($| )/\1static\2/"
2) Do some manual cleanup in the diff by searching for the word STATIC in
comments and changing those back.
3) "git-grep STATIC docs/", manually fixed those cases.
4) "rg -t python STATIC", manually fixed codegen lines that used STATIC.
This work was funded through GitHub Sponsors.
Signed-off-by: Angus Gratton <angus@redyak.com.au>
It's no longer needed because this macro is now processed after
preprocessing the source code via cpp (in the qstr extraction stage), which
means unused MP_REGISTER_MODULE's are filtered out by the preprocessor.
Signed-off-by: Damien George <damien@micropython.org>
The 1-wire bus is defined with fixed timings so there should be no need to
change them dynamically at runtime. Making the timings fixed saves about
270 bytes of code and 20 bytes of RAM.
The reason it was separated is so that the low-level code could be put in
iRAM, for timing reasons. But:
1. Tests show that it's not necessary to have this code in iRAM for it to
function correctly, and taking it out of iRAM reclaims some of that precious
resource. Furthermore, even though these functions were in iRAM there were
some functions that it called (eg pin get/set functions) which were not in
iRAM, so partially defeated the purpose of putting the 1-wire code in iRAM.
2. It's easier to reuse this 1-wire code in other ports if it's in a single
file.
3. If it turns out that certain code does need to be in iRAM then one can
use the MP_FASTCODE macro to do that.
Previously they used historical "pyb" affix causing confusion and
inconsistency (there's no "pyb" module in modern ports; but people
took esp8266 port as an example, and "pyb" naming kept proliferating,
while other people complained that source structure is not clear).
Angus Gratton
Elias Wimmer
Patrick Van Oosterwijck
Damien George
Jim Mussared
Damien George
Paul Sokolovsky