> -----Original Message----- > From: > [email protected] > [mailto:simulavr-devel-bounces+eweddington=cso.atmel....@nongn > u.org] On Behalf Of Joerg Wunsch > Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 8:28 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: test result code was Re: [Simulavr-devel] > avrtest and simulavrvssimulavrxx > > As Weddington, Eric wrote: > > (Timeframe for the transition from old simulavr to simulavrxx.) > > > I would bet you a good German beer that it would take less time than > > that for the "legions" of old simulavr users to switch over. ;-) > > I wonder where you'd get the good German beer from over in > Colorado. :)
Well, I would just have to come and visit you in Dresden then. ;-) > The big question mark is simply that you'll never know for sure in an > opensource project about how many active users might actually be out > there. I've sometimes be surprised by people approaching me in > private mail, when it turned out they've been using a particular > feature for years you'd never have guessed about, just because the > feature has once been there. Just remember how many years we've been > telling people that there was really no realistic reason for crying > after the death of the old sbi and cbi macros... However avr-libc is used everywhere. I still say that there are not very many old simulavr users. Avarice users, yes. > Stories like these make me a little cautious about dropping certain > backwards compatibility when it were actually easy enough to maintain. If it's easy enough for backwards compatibility, fine. But don't let it get in the way of doing good things. _______________________________________________ Simulavr-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/simulavr-devel
