Re: [avr-libc-dev] Progmem types compatibility

[Jan Waclawek]

While the #defines are indeed a dead-end (as someone who inspected the 
internals of the progmem attribute could see much easier than a mere user), my 
point was that priority should be given for continuity for users (and pay more 
attention to documentation and education), rather than invent new names for 
library items - but I am too tired to repeat my arguments again.

JW


----- Original Message ---------------
>And the outcome was that the macro solution is not really suitable
>as a replacement.

[...]

>I agree that having typedefs for the named address space
>implementation might be a good thing.  They should probably start
>with flash_ (rather than prog_) then, to clearly indicate they are
>*different*, and need a different usage.