[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] Code Optimisation question re: volatile

From: David Brown
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Code Optimisation question re: volatile
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:42:02 +0200

> "Svein E. Seldal" <address@hidden> wrote:
> >>     pwm_state ^= _b00000011;
> > Is this syntax standard C? I've never seen this before...
> I guess it's rather a macro...

It certainly appears to be a macro - I simply copied it from the original
poster's code so that I wouldn't be changing more than necessary.


> I've got a patch that implementes 0b binary numbers for GCC (including
> documentation update, finally :), do you think the GCC folks could be
> braught to accept such a patch?  Many other compiler vendors allow for
> this extension already, and my reading of the standard didn't show me
> anything that would make it illegal to provide such an extension.
> (Eric included the patch in the GCC that ships with the current
> WinAVR.)
> --
> J"org Wunsch        Unix support engineer
> address@hidden
> _______________________________________________
> avr-gcc-list mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://www.avr1.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]