>>>>> Weddington, Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
>> I'm primarily interested in what will be the solution to the
>> problem? Would one of these be renamed, and which one, or both?
>> Once it will be decided, an appropriate patch will be a matter of
>> fifteen minutes.
> The bit names for the registers have been around a long time. Those
> would NOT be renamed. The fuse feature is new, so any renaming would
> be done one those names.
ACK. Thanks for the explanation.
> For example, I would propose renaming the SELFPRGEN fuse definition
> to SELFPRGEN_FUSE. And other duplicates renamed in a similar manner:
> add the _FUSE suffix.
Just two questions then:
* is there a particular reason to use a suffix and not, say, a
prefix?
* wouldn't it be better to apply the suffix (or prefix)
consistently to all the fuse bit definitions, and not only to
those that actually clash with the other definitions?
>> As to searching for duplicates, the following script seems to find
>> them (all?):
>> include $ (for f in avr/io?*.h ; do cpp -I. -D__ASSEMBLER__ <(echo "#define
>> _AVR_IO_H_" ; echo "#include \"${f}\"") /dev/null ; done) 2>&1
[...]
>> I'm not sure there're no false positives in the above output. Hope
>> it helps, anyway.
> This helps a whole lot! :-) Thank you very much!
You're welcome.
_______________________________________________
AVR-libc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev
