As Wojtek Kaniewski wrote: > What about the SIG_ prefix? If we'll move to something else than > SIGNAL(), I think that it should be dropped or somehow hidden from > the users.
Very good point. I've been thinking about adding a second set of vector names anyway. Our names are completely self-invented. In the long run, I'd rather like to migrate the names as they appear in the Atmel XML files, which incidentally also match those IAR is using. So e.g., SIG_INTERRUPT0 would get an alias named INT0_vect. Besides of being closer to the datasheet and XML specs, it provides for a rather easy option to write source code that is portable between IAR and GCC (as the remainder can be encapsulated in header files, now that IAR includes the C99 _Pragma() operator). As Royce Pereira wrote: > In SDCC (mcs51 open source C compiler) one can name their ISR as > anything, and then set an attribute to specify it as an ISR for a > specific source. > void zerocrossover(void) interrupt EXT0 > Can this be done with AVR-GCC and what would be the problems > implementing this? Not easily. It would require massive changes in both, GCC and avr-libc, and I don't see any obvious advantage that would justify the effort required to do this. As Russell Shaw wrote: > You could also use INTERRUPT_(). That's too confusing, I'd say. As Wojtek Kaniewski wrote: [about AVR generic IO abstraction headers] > >My only concern is to not pollute the include/avr subdirectory itself > >too much. > I'd prefer those functions to be in <util/*> than <avr/generic/*>. I could live with that. Eric, does that match your intentions as well? -- cheers, J"org .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list