> > Where the number in the last case is, of course, taken > > directly from the > > Atmel vector table in the specification for the respective > > processor and > > adjusted as necessary by the compiler. > > > > My only objection is that the number vector correspond to normal > avr-libc usage and NOT from the Atmel datasheet, where avr-libc usage > is > zero-based and one off from the datasheet. I would rather the options > be: > > void __vector_9 (void) > __attribute__ ((signal,used,externally_visible)); > void __vector_9 (void) { > > Or: > > void MyTimer0OvfInt(void) > __attribute__((signal,9,used,externally_visible)); > void MyTimer0OvfInt(void) { > > If they are the same number, then it avoids confusion. I know it > doesn't > match the datasheet, but we have already established the precedent, and > I would rather be internally consistent. > > Eric Weddington
Ok. I would have thought that makes for confusion, but I guess those using this method can be assumed to be the cognisenti. Ron _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list