Re: [avr-gcc-list] What Happened to the sbi() and cbi() Macros????

[Pertti Kellomäki]

4. helmi 2005 kello 01:00, Richard Urwin <address@hidden> 
wrote:
> It seems to me that there are two arguments here:
>
> 1. The removal of cbi and sbi breaks existing code.
>
> 2. The removal of cbi and sbi make code more obscure.

You are missing the third argument, which has been
thrown about to support removing them:

3. The removal of cbi and sbi makes code cleaner

This is what has been objected to in many posts. I am still
mystified what metric makes

  SFR &=~mask;

simpler and cleaner than

  cbi(SFR, bit_num);

It is not that I cannot decode the first form. I can still after
twenty years write RCA 1802 assembly in hex from my head.
I just prefer "clear this bit in SFR for me" to "negate this bitfield,
do a bitwise and, and assign the result to SFR".
--
Pertti