Re: [avr-libc-dev] Re: [avr-gcc-list] Poll: Who uses itoa() & co with base != {2, 8, 10, 16}?

[Joerg Wunsch]

"Colin O'Flynn" <address@hidden> wrote:

> "The road to hell is paved with good intentions", we aren't so
> different ;-)

Neither are the Germans: ,,Der Weg zur Hölle ist mit guten Vorsätzen
gepflastert.''

I guess I agree with Bernard's argumentation, basically.

> PS: From now on should we just discuss this an avr-libc-dev, it
> seems more in place at this point?

I agree.  I'd like to ``officially'' finish the poll here, and thank
everyone who participated.  I know people are interested in getter
faster and smaller code, but also think violating POLA is not to be
taken lightly.  I'll see what will eventually come out, but it should
be at least a compile-time option to select the faster (and smaller)
routines.

-- 
cheers, J"org               .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/                        NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)