• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Subscribers 52 subscribers
  • Views 876 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

ULP advisor 14.1 not detected correctly

TobyM
Genius 5200 points

Hi folks,

In CCSv6.1.3.00034 I have come across an issue with a ULP advisor rule 14.1 (marked as #2553-D, though I'm not sure what that refers to)

I have a 16-bit  integer declared using the stdint.h data type (i.e. int16_t i = 0;) that is used as an array index.

Yet when used, ULP advises that: " Array index (involving "i") of type "int16_t". Recommend using "int16_t"", which of course seems to state that int16_t is incorrect because it's not int16_t... which is obviously nonsensical.

I take it it's looking for use of a particular definition of int16_t maybe?

Furthermore, is a size_t type not the C recommended type to use for indexing arrays?

  • 0
    TI__Guru**** 239845 points

    The diagnostic is correctly issued, but the wording is wrong.  The full story is on this wiki page.  In short, unsigned array index variables work better than signed ones.  I filed CODEGEN-1545 in the SDOWP system to have this investigated.  You are welcome to follow it with the SDOWP link below in my signature.

    Toby Mole said:
    is a size_t type not the C recommended type to use for indexing arrays?

    The type size_t is unsigned, so it works well as an array index variable type.

    Thanks and regards,

    -George

  • 0 in reply to George Mock
    Genius 5200 points

    George,

    Many thanks for the info and for filling the bug.