[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate
From: |
Dmitry K. |
Subject: |
Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.] |
Date: |
Sun, 15 Jun 2003 18:39:50 +1100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5 |
Good evening!
Thank for the substantial answer.
> Please elaborate. If you have any reason to still use one of the
> constructs that has been marked deprecated (or is currently discussed
> to be), please speak up.
> So far, deprecation affected the following items, included the
> reasoning:
>
> . timer_enable_int() and enable_external_int()
> . eeprom_rb(), eeprom_wb(), eeprom_rw()
> . BV()
There are no objections.
> However, this
> could be solved by providing a generic register name definition in
> another header file instead, say <compat/io.h> or maybe
> <avr/genericio.h>, something that is needed for many other commonly
> found AVR features as well (different names of the UART registers
> between different AVRs come to mind).
Excellent idea.
> . sbi(), cbi()
In old library these expressions were realized through the asm() containing
the appropriate commands (for a lower half of ports). Definitions as
"REG |= _BV(BIT)" do not give atomic operations by the switched off
optimization: it is checked up.
It will confuse not only veterans, but also beginners as words "sbi/cbi"
associate with appropriate commands AVR. The option "-O0" is used: first by
search of mistakes, and second at test of real-time programs for stability.
> . inp(), outp(), inb(), (outb() ?)
"avr-libc" it is widely used already 3 - 4 years, and an opportunity of direct
use of ports in expressions only recently. I believe, ALL old programs use
these functions.
> . outb()
I can not judge. Probably, it is better to remove absolutely than to change
the order of arguments. Though even to change for more correct.
Yours sincerely,
Dmitry.
P.S. "to deprecate" it is a synonym "to exclude" ?
- [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.], eric, 2003/06/13
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.], Dmitry K., 2003/06/13
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.], Joerg Wunsch, 2003/06/14
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.],
Dmitry K. <=
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.], Joerg Wunsch, 2003/06/15
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.], Dmitry K., 2003/06/15
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.], Russell Shaw, 2003/06/15
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.], Dmitry K., 2003/06/15
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.], Dmitry K., 2003/06/15
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.], Russell Shaw, 2003/06/15
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.], Dmitry K., 2003/06/16
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.], Joerg Wunsch, 2003/06/18
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Deprecation policy [was: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Deprecate inb / outb.], Dmitry K., 2003/06/18