Re: [avr-libc-dev] Change EEPROM SFR definition.

[Bernard Fouché]

E. Weddington wrote:

> Björn Haase wrote:
>
> > Another alternative is to provide smarter macros or inline functions 
> > for eeprom support that contain inline assembly for calling different 
> > versions of the eeprom routines.
>
> That's a reasonable idea. Would anyone have any objection to having 
> the EEPROM routines be inline assembly macros instead of library calls?
>
> I'm even willing to write up such a module, though it would have to be 
> after my vacation (which starts in an hour ;-)).
>
> Eric

Will this increase program size, for instance if a program writes the 
EEPROM in ten different places? If so one can make a function that calls 
the macro once but again documentation should be very clear about such a 
change.

   Bernard