[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[avr-libc-dev] Re: SPMEN vs SELFPRGEN
From: |
Ivan Shmakov |
Subject: |
[avr-libc-dev] Re: SPMEN vs SELFPRGEN |
Date: |
Fri, 04 Jan 2008 00:00:19 +0600 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) |
>>>>> Weddington, Eric <address@hidden> writes:
>>> BTW, since SPMEN seems to be frequent alias to SELFPRGEN, why not
>>> to define one of them in a common file (`io.h'?) instead of
>>> defining both in each of the part-specific headers (where
>>> applicable)? E. g.:
> In the future, the IO header files will be generated from the XML
> part files from Atmel, requiring a 1-to-1 relationship of XML->IO
> header file. It would be difficult to do this if common definitions
> are put in separate files.
Oh, indeed.
BTW, is there any way to get these XML files (other than
downloading AVR Studio)?
>> Since `SPMEN' seems to be used more widely in the AVR Libc includes
>> as the name for the bit, I suggest replacing `SELFPRGEN' with
>> `SPMEN' in the macro definitions in the individual io*.h files, like
>> the following. (Though it could easily done the other way around.)
> Our policy is to provide definitions that are found in the XML part
> description files provided by Atmel.
Does the name vary in the part description files themselves? Or
where these different names came from?
- [avr-libc-dev] SPMEN vs SELFPRGEN, Ivan Shmakov, 2008/01/03
- RE: [avr-libc-dev] SPMEN vs SELFPRGEN, Weddington, Eric, 2008/01/03
- [avr-libc-dev] Re: SPMEN vs SELFPRGEN,
Ivan Shmakov <=
- RE: [avr-libc-dev] Re: SPMEN vs SELFPRGEN, Weddington, Eric, 2008/01/03
- [avr-libc-dev] Re: SPMEN vs SELFPRGEN, Ivan Shmakov, 2008/01/03
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Re: SPMEN vs SELFPRGEN, Joerg Wunsch, 2008/01/03
- RE: [avr-libc-dev] Re: SPMEN vs SELFPRGEN, Weddington, Eric, 2008/01/03
- [avr-libc-dev] Re: SPMEN vs SELFPRGEN, Ivan Shmakov, 2008/01/04