RE: [avr-gcc-list] RFC: Patch for "signal" argument

[Ron Kreymborg]

> Can the "error" have  overide?
> 
> Might that be useful to permit code generation for a new variant
> before GCC has caught up with full definitions?
> 
> Andy

The ones for the ISR macros were originally warnings, but their occurrence
invariably meant the jump table was not linked to the interrupt function.
Ditto with the proposed ISRN macros. But yes, I see your point, and warnings
would allow the compile to proceed. Perhaps the doco could explain what are
the consequences when the warning appears and then it is "user beware".

Ron