On Feb 29, 2008, at 11:14 AM, Shaun Jackman wrote:

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


If you look at Dmitry's header, you'll see that you pass the address of eeprom_read_byte or eeprom_write_byte.

--
Rick Altherr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

"He said he hadn't had a byte in three days. I had a short, so I split it with him."
 -- Slashdot signature


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
AVR-libc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev

Reply via email to