| commit | 79e6b0e0f679b1c914352734d67b4a6da14eb465 | [log] [tgz] |
|---|---|---|
| author | Gerard Marull-Paretas <gerard.marull@nordicsemi.no> | Thu Aug 25 09:58:46 2022 +0200 |
| committer | Carles Cufí <carles.cufi@nordicsemi.no> | Mon Sep 05 16:31:47 2022 +0200 |
| tree | f94e3fd100e5f0d3c251cebef169f73594897239 | |
| parent | a6fb18541dda9f164efde9f20a5f65534721691d [diff] |
includes: prefer <zephyr/kernel.h> over <zephyr/zephyr.h> As of today <zephyr/zephyr.h> is 100% equivalent to <zephyr/kernel.h>. This patch proposes to then include <zephyr/kernel.h> instead of <zephyr/zephyr.h> since it is more clear that you are including the Kernel APIs and (probably) nothing else. <zephyr/zephyr.h> sounds like a catch-all header that may be confusing. Most applications need to include a bunch of other things to compile, e.g. driver headers or subsystem headers like BT, logging, etc. The idea of a catch-all header in Zephyr is probably not feasible anyway. Reason is that Zephyr is not a library, like it could be for example `libpython`. Zephyr provides many utilities nowadays: a kernel, drivers, subsystems, etc and things will likely grow. A catch-all header would be massive, difficult to keep up-to-date. It is also likely that an application will only build a small subset. Note that subsystem-level headers may use a catch-all approach to make things easier, though. NOTE: This patch is **NOT** removing the header, just removing its usage in-tree. I'd advocate for its deprecation (add a #warning on it), but I understand many people will have concerns. Signed-off-by: Gerard Marull-Paretas <gerard.marull@nordicsemi.no>