Re: [avr-libc-dev] [RFC] New eeprom.h

[Rick Altherr]

On Feb 29, 2008, at 11:14 AM, Shaun Jackman wrote:

> > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:48 AM, Rick Altherr <address@hidden>  
> > wrote:
> ...
> > There might be an intermediate ground where the core functionality  
> > could be
> > written as a set of inline functions.  The library code could just  
> > make a
> > non-inline function that calls the inline routine.  In the header,  
> > we could
> > then provide 2 sets of API: one set of inline functions that call the
> > internal routine and a set of macros that call the non-inline  
> > function.
> > That should allow the end user to choose between code size and speed.
> ...
>
> Which approach do you plan on using for the non-inline functions?
> Passing the address of the EEPROM registers as an argument?
>
> Cheers,
> Shaun


If you look at Dmitry's header, you'll see that you pass the address  
of eeprom_read_byte or eeprom_write_byte.

--
Rick Altherr
address@hidden

"He said he hadn't had a byte in three days. I had a short, so I split  
it with him."
 -- Slashdot signature

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature