Re: [avr-gcc-list] Code generation on 3.3

[E. Weddington]

On 22 Jan 2003 at 16:03, Theodore A. Roth wrote:

> 
> 
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Sander Pool wrote:
> 
> :)
> :) Anyone who's coded for the USART on the m128 has run into this
> problem. :) Convenient code samples from gcctest or elsewhere don't
> compile because the :) registers have different names. I was thinking
> of writing an include file :) that provides the :) 'standard'
> non-numbered UART register symbols for the m128. Default would be :)
> USART1 but a #define would turn it into USART0. :) :) This would make
> code portable accross more AVR types. Of course if you need :) to use
> both USARTs or if you're a tad masochistic you can still use the :)
> numbered registers :-) :)
> 
> I started to do something about that but got vetoed:
> 
>   http://mail.nongnu.org/archive/html/avr-libc-dev/2002-12/msg00074.ht
>   ml
> 
> My opinion is that the library should abstract the subtle differences
> between parts whenever it can. I know this isn't always possible, but
> where it can be done, it would greatly ease the transition from a one
> device to another.
> 

Well, since you brought up the thread, I wouldn't see any problem 
with Jörg's proposal for it:

http://mail.nongnu.org/archive/html/avr-libc-dev/2002-
12/msg00076.html

It would leave the io defines as is, and provide an additional layer 
which could be used if desired. Let the programmer pick and choose.

Eric
avr-gcc-list at http://avr1.org