Re: [avr-gcc-list] FYI: RFC to rename INTERRUPT to something else

[Joerg Wunsch]

"David Brown" <address@hidden> wrote:

> Given the importance of the subject of interrupts to all avr-gcc
> users, perhaps it is worth making it clearer on this list too?

I'd rather keep discussions on one list.  We can always followup with
a summary here once things are clearer.

>>From what I read on the above message, it seems the "INTERRUPT"
>macro will be depreciated and then removed (presumably the underlying
>function attrbitute will be unchanged).

(Btw., not depreciated but deprecated.  That's a slight difference.)

Yep, that's the intention.

> This is a good thing, as the INTERRUPT macro
> does not do what users expect ...

And that's the main reason.

-- 
J"org Wunsch                                           Unix support engineer
address@hidden        http://www.interface-systems.de/~j/