[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [avr-gcc-list] RFC: Patch for "signal" argument
From: |
Ron Kreymborg |
Subject: |
RE: [avr-gcc-list] RFC: Patch for "signal" argument |
Date: |
Tue, 1 Apr 2008 13:13:28 +1100 |
> Can the "error" have overide?
>
> Might that be useful to permit code generation for a new variant
> before GCC has caught up with full definitions?
>
> Andy
The ones for the ISR macros were originally warnings, but their occurrence
invariably meant the jump table was not linked to the interrupt function.
Ditto with the proposed ISRN macros. But yes, I see your point, and warnings
would allow the compile to proceed. Perhaps the doco could explain what are
the consequences when the warning appears and then it is "user beware".
Ron
- [avr-gcc-list] avr-gcc build errors, Mark, 2008/03/26
- RE: [avr-gcc-list] avr-gcc build errors, Weddington, Eric, 2008/03/26
- [avr-gcc-list] RFC: Patch for "signal" argument, Ron Kreymborg, 2008/03/31
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] RFC: Patch for "signal" argument, hutchinsonandy, 2008/03/31
- RE: [avr-gcc-list] RFC: Patch for "signal" argument,
Ron Kreymborg <=
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] RFC: Patch for "signal" argument, Andy H, 2008/03/31
- RE: [avr-gcc-list] RFC: Patch for "signal" argument, Ron Kreymborg, 2008/03/31
- RE: [avr-gcc-list] RFC: Patch for "signal" argument, Weddington, Eric, 2008/03/31
RE: [avr-gcc-list] avr-gcc build errors, Weddington, Eric, 2008/03/26
Re: [avr-gcc-list] avr-gcc build errors, Joerg Wunsch, 2008/03/27
Re: [avr-gcc-list] avr-gcc build errors, Neil Davey, 2008/03/27