Hi Vasile,

> Please, please double check the size of your code. I've seen a lot of sdword
> and dwords.
To support 24lc1025, 17 bits address are required. As far as I know,
dwords are only used when required to support this.
We could reduce the size for smaller epproms, but this would change
the API, dependent on the chip. Nevertheless, the footprint of this
library will be larger than the small one, with the ram for the buffer
and program code to handle this. So I doubt reducing the byte size is
worth it.

>Remember the eeprom is used also with smaller memory micros. The
> code in this situation must be useful for other things than writing into an
> eeprom, right?
> I feel the old eeprom library (or just routines) should be kept as well into
> the distribution, but maybe I'm wrong.
True, the old library is better when you can't afford the footprint of
the new one and don't need the speed of writing.

Joep

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"jallib" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.

Reply via email to