Re: [avr-gcc-list] Re: What Happened to the sbi() and cbi() Macros????

[Joerg Wunsch]

As E. Weddington wrote:

> This is another reason why I am proposing <avr/bit.h>, because it
> will supply a *full* range of bit manipulating macros. Newbies can
> go use the macros which should be easy to select, and they can
> always look inside at how they're implemented and maybe learn a
> thing or two.

I'm not completely opposed to it, but I'm not very enthusiastic about
it either.  I'd be more comfortable with the idea of either writing a
FAQ entry for it (quick method), or maybe an entire doxygen page of
its own describing the C basics of bit manipulation, including
cut'npaste-able macro definitions.  That way, you can make sure people
actually have to read something about it before they can use it. ;-)

See my argumentation, in the end I think everyone should rather see
this as a chance to improve their level of abstraction, and instead of
blindly replacing cbi/sbi by another macro of the same function,
invent a macro that is more descriptive in terms of what it does in
that particular application (like turning LEDs on/off in my example).

-- 
cheers, J"org               .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/                        NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)