Re: [avr-libc-dev] User-visible library version numbers

[Joerg Wunsch]

As Bob Paddock wrote:

> > >. __AVR_LIBC_VERSION__ "1.4.0"  /* a string */
> > >. __AVR_LIBC_MAJOR__   1        /* three integers */
> > >. __AVR_LIBC_MINOR__   4
> > >. __AVR_LIBC_TINY__    0

> As do I.  GCC refers to _TINY_ as _PATCHLEVEL, see below.

I'm not that happy about `patchlevel' (actually, it's probably rather
`releaselevel' for us, but as the release number consist of all three
elements, that would be confusing), that's why I've been searching for
a different name.  I'm open for better suggestions though.

> Yes.
> 
> #ifdef __GNUC__
> 
> #define __GCC_VERSION__ (__GNUC__ * 10000 \
>                              + __GNUC_MINOR__ * 100 \
>                              + __GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__)

But then, why not offer that as __AVR_LIBC_RELEASE__ right from the
beginning?  (Perhaps in parallel with the three-piece macros.)  I feel
the standardized macro to have a single test for a particular release
to be a big win.

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

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