[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h
From: |
Weddington, Eric |
Subject: |
RE: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h |
Date: |
Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:48:44 -0700 |
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden
> org] On Behalf Of David Brown
> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 12:34 PM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h
>
> Weddington, Eric wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From:
> >> address@hidden
> >> [mailto:address@hidden
> >> org] On Behalf Of David Brown
> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 10:01 AM
> >> To: address@hidden
> >> Subject: Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h
> >>
> >> Weddington, Eric wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> The current eeprom.h file from the latest winavr package uses static
> inline functions in exactly this way, unless I'm really
> getting things
> mixed up.
Point.
Personally, I've just never been fond of the idea of putting function
definitions in header files.
> > - The inline portion wouldn't work because we now have
> object code, and
> > the linking stage (AFAIK) doesn't do inlining.
>
> It does not *yet* do inlining in this way.
But I have to deal with today, not the future.
> Is a multi-lib avrlibc something that is being considered? I can see
> that there would be definite advantages, but I can also see
> it being a
> lot more work.
We have a task in the project Task List for it, but as you said, it's a
lot more work and no one has had the time or inclination to tackle it.
Eric W.
- [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Weddington, Eric, 2008/01/15
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Anton Erasmus, 2008/01/16
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, David Brown, 2008/01/16
- RE: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Weddington, Eric, 2008/01/16
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, David Brown, 2008/01/16
- RE: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Weddington, Eric, 2008/01/16
- RE: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Michael Hennebry, 2008/01/16
- RE: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Weddington, Eric, 2008/01/16
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, David Brown, 2008/01/16
- RE: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h,
Weddington, Eric <=
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Rick Altherr, 2008/01/16
- RE: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Weddington, Eric, 2008/01/16
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Rick Altherr, 2008/01/16
- RE: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Weddington, Eric, 2008/01/16
- RE: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Wouter van Gulik, 2008/01/27
- RE: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Weddington, Eric, 2008/01/27
- Message not available
- RE: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Weddington, Eric, 2008/01/27
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h, Joerg Wunsch, 2008/01/28
- [avr-libc-dev] Re: [RFC] New eeprom.h, Ivan Shmakov, 2008/01/28