Re: [avr-libc-dev] dox status and next release

[E. Weddington]

On 14 Oct 2002 at 18:15, Joerg Wunsch wrote:

> The only open topic was whether it's OK to have no _LPM() (but only
> __LPM()) in the default header, i. e. to require users who want the
> IAR compatibility names to include <avr/ina90.h>.
> 

IMHO, users who want an API that belongs to another compiler should 
have to include the appropriate header file needed.

But what were the rules regarding 1 and 2 leading underscores? (I 
think I missed that).

Thanks,
Eric