Zipping compiler warning about POW_PD_EXT / Two options

[ia]

• There is a warning related to POW_PD_EXT:

In file included from Core/Threads/OperatingModes/ShowStartupWarnings.cpp:1:
./Core/Drivers/HUB238.hpp:6:5: warning: "POW_PD_EXT" is not defined, evaluates to 0 [-Wundef]
    6 | #if POW_PD_EXT == 1
      |     ^~~~~~~~~~
Core/Threads/OperatingModes/ShowStartupWarnings.cpp:40:5: warning: "POW_PD_EXT" is not defined, evaluates to 0 [-Wundef]
   40 | #if POW_PD_EXT == 1
      |     ^~~~~~~~~~
In file included from Core/Threads/OperatingModes/USBPDDebug_HUSB238.cpp:1:
./Core/Drivers/HUB238.hpp:6:5: warning: "POW_PD_EXT" is not defined, evaluates to 0 [-Wundef]
    6 | #if POW_PD_EXT == 1
      |     ^~~~~~~~~~
Core/Threads/OperatingModes/USBPDDebug_HUSB238.cpp:3:5: warning: "POW_PD_EXT" is not defined, evaluates to 0 [-Wundef]
    3 | #if POW_PD_EXT == 1
      |     ^~~~~~~~~~
In file included from Core/Threads/POWThread.cpp:10:
./Core/Drivers/HUB238.hpp:6:5: warning: "POW_PD_EXT" is not defined, evaluates to 0 [-Wundef]
    6 | #if POW_PD_EXT == 1
      |     ^~~~~~~~~~
Core/Threads/POWThread.cpp:62:5: warning: "POW_PD_EXT" is not defined, evaluates to 0 [-Wundef]
   62 | #if POW_PD_EXT == 1
      |     ^~~~~~~~~~
In file included from Core/Drivers/HUB238.cpp:1:
Core/Drivers/HUB238.hpp:6:5: warning: "POW_PD_EXT" is not defined, evaluates to 0 [-Wundef]
    6 | #if POW_PD_EXT == 1
      |     ^~~~~~~~~~
Core/Drivers/HUB238.cpp:6:5: warning: "POW_PD_EXT" is not defined, evaluates to 0 [-Wundef]
    6 | #if POW_PD_EXT == 1
      |     ^~~~~~~~~~

• I have suggestion with two options:
  • Option A: explicitly add #define POW_PD_EXT 0 to every configuration.h header file.
  • Option B: update #if POW_PD_EXT == 1 to #ifdef POW_PD_EXT.

In my opinion Option B is more preferable ... unless there are some pitfalls and the actual value (0/1) must be checked.

[Ralim]

Option 1 is preferable; as I suspect that in the future we will have to support other "external" USB-PD controllers (knowing my luck). Just guessing from looking at the market, with people moving to dedicated controllers rather than getting a PD stack working.

[ia]

Wouldn't you find this way more readable? If no, I will revert it without a question.

Here it doesn't show the idea of modification properly - just in case, for easier review that's what I did. What do you think?

[Ralim]

Yeah this is a fine cleanup

[ia]

I may not understanding some particularities so correct me if I'm wrong but shouldn't endif for include-guard be in the very end of the file, right?

[Ralim]

yeah thats a mistake

[ia]

And shouldn't this line be more like this: start = xTaskGetTickCount(); (since it declared with type few lines above) ?
I can update this line with next commit right here too if so. Currently it gives shadowed declaration warning.

Sorry for pedantry, just trying to help & be useful. The more eyes the better, right?

[Ralim]

Ill fix the oled shadowing later today; would like to keep it out of this PR