Hi, On 9/26/07, Colin O'Flynn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > > I propose a counter-argument: it makes no sense for *the user* to want to > > program a single fuse byte. > > I agree with Eric 100% here. If you are going to be setting the fuse bytes, > you > *must* set them all. Otherwise you are assuming the current state of fuse > bytes. Sure they *should* be default, but if someone else had their hands on > the chip it might change. That's the sorta scenario where two months down the > road stuff stops working, and you can't figure out why...
Perhaps, what should be included is a set of fuse bytes and a corresponding mask. This would allow the program to set just the bits it was interested in, rather than being required to set all of the bits. -- Dave Hylands Vancouver, BC, Canada http://www.DaveHylands.com/ _______________________________________________ AVR-libc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev
