fix(max17048): Add boilerplate ifdef cplusplus so max17048 functions can be called from c++ (AEGHB-1021)

[victorfleischauer]

Description

Functions in max17048 cannot be called in a C++ file by including "max17048.h" due to C++ name mangling. This PR adds the boilerplate #ifdef __cplusplus extern "C" { to deal with this.

Testing

Tested by including in .cpp and .c test file with the example code

---

Checklist

Before submitting a Pull Request, please ensure the following:

• [ ] 🚨 This PR does not introduce breaking changes.
• [ ] All CI checks (GH Actions) pass.
• [ ] Documentation is updated as needed.
• [ ] Tests are updated or added as necessary.
• [ ] Code is well-commented, especially in complex areas.
• [ ] Git history is clean — commits are squashed to the minimum necessary.

[github-actions[bot]]

Warnings

:warning:

Some issues found for the commit messages in this PR: the commit message "style(max17048): Added new empty line at end of file": type/action should be one of [change, ci, docs, feat, fix, refactor, remove, revert, test] Please fix these commit messages - here are some basic tips: follow Conventional Commits style correct format of commit message should be: <type/action>(<scope/component>): <summary>, for example fix(esp32): Fixed startup timeout issue allowed types are: change,ci,docs,feat,fix,refactor,remove,revert,test sufficiently descriptive message summary should be between 20 to 72 characters and start with upper case letter avoid Jira references in commit messages (unavailable/irrelevant for our customers) TIP: Install pre-commit hooks and run this check when committing (uses the Conventional Precommit Linter).

👋 Hello victorfleischauer, we appreciate your contribution to this project!

---

Click to see more instructions ...

This automated output is generated by the PR linter DangerJS, which checks if your Pull Request meets the project's requirements and helps you fix potential issues.

DangerJS is triggered with each push event to a Pull Request and modify the contents of this comment.

Please consider the following:
- Danger mainly focuses on the PR structure and formatting and can't understand the meaning behind your code or changes.
- Danger is not a substitute for human code reviews; it's still important to request a code review from your colleagues.
- Resolve all warnings (⚠️ ) before requesting a review from human reviewers - they will appreciate it.
- To manually retry these Danger checks, please navigate to the Actions tab and re-run last Danger workflow.

Review and merge process you can expect ...

We do welcome contributions in the form of bug reports, feature requests and pull requests.

1. An internal issue has been created for the PR, we assign it to the relevant engineer.
2. They review the PR and either approve it or ask you for changes or clarifications.
3. Once the GitHub PR is approved we do the final review, collect approvals from core owners and make sure all the automated tests are passing.
- At this point we may do some adjustments to the proposed change, or extend it by adding tests or documentation.
4. If the change is approved and passes the tests it is merged into the default branch.

Generated by :no_entry_sign: dangerJS against 79572fae27156ccc4fcefe6c9e57cc525869b6b0

[leeebo]

@victorfleischauer LGTM! Thanks!

[leeebo]

sha=52673778b83e926b77a94c02fb8d13321fea1562

[YanKE01]

LGTM!

[leeebo]

sha=79572fae27156ccc4fcefe6c9e57cc525869b6b0