C[omp]ute

From: andrew cooke <andrew@...>

Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2025 20:12:08 -0400

An obscure fix that maybe google will pick up and pass on to help out
a poor lost soul...

If you're using __not_in_flash_func with multi argument templates then
why the hell are you using templates in an embedded system?  Lol.  But
some of us enjoy a challenge so...

   template<uint A, uint B> void __not_in_flash_func(Class<A, B>func(int p))() {
     ...
   }

does not work.  It does not work because the comma between A and B
implies two arguments to the macro.

Google AI suggests an extra set of parens:

   template<uint A, uint B> void __not_in_flash_func((Class<A, B>func(int p)))() {
     ...
   }

which gets past the preprocessor, but breaks the linker (where the
comma matters again).

What seems to work (ugly, but you probably don't need it much) is:

   template<uint A, uint B> void __attribute__((section(".time_critical." "my-class-func")))
   Class<A, B>func(int p)() {
     ...
   }

(note all the parens, weird "."s, and lack of comma).

The "my-class-func" defines a group for deletion which should probably
be unique (the macro __not_in_flash_func just uses the argument) - you
should maybe care about template args, but if you're only
instantiating the template in one way (or maybe I am weird) then
that's not an issue.

Good luck!
Andrew