Re: [avr-gcc-list] FYI: RFC to rename INTERRUPT to something else

[David Brown]

> For those interested, please subscribe to the avr-libc developers
> list, or read about the thread in the list archives starting at
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/avr-libc-dev/2005-02/msg00092.html
>

Given the importance of the subject of interrupts to all avr-gcc users,
perhaps it is worth making it clearer on this list too?  After all, I think
most avr-gcc users are avr-libc users, and vice versa, especially in light
of the previous discussion on depreciating and removing things from avr-gcc
/ avr-libc.

>From what I read on the above message, it seems the "INTERRUPT" macro will
be depreciated and then removed (presumably the underlying function
attrbitute will be unchanged).  This is a good thing, as the INTERRUPT macro
does not do what users expect and are used to from other embedded tools
(both other avr compilers, and other embedded gcc projects).  The mspgcc
people got it right (from the point of view of an embedded developer, and
IMHO of course) by having "signal" as the interruptable version and
"interrupt" as the non-interruptable version.  It is, obviously, far to late
to change the meanings of these macros, so the next best thing is to
depreciate it and remove it.

mvh.,

David