Re: [avr-gcc-list] Re: Patch Fix PR35013, PR27192

[Dave N6NZ]

Andy H wrote:
<snip>
> To fix is not simple. The following are ideas only - please add some more
<snip>
> 2) We could avoid using gs() and get function address as byte address + 
> byte offset.  This would require extra run-time code for function 
> pointer calls (to divide by two). It is useful in that same pointers 
> could be used to read bytes from program memory.
Doesn't this halve the reach of code pointers?  So won't it break some 
code that presently works on 128K AVR's?

-dave