> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:48 AM, Rick Altherr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 _______________________________________________ AVR-libc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev
