On 01/03/11 16:03, Erik Christiansen wrote: > Errrrr ... Bob, if "result" is in RAM, and so can't be changed by > hardware, and interrupts have not been reenabled (we're in an ISR), > then how can "result" be volatile?
In this case, it could be made non-volatile as it's (now) only read outside of the interrupt, but it wasn't when I started this and noticed the code :-) > If memory serves me, here "volatile" is nearly as good as beer, for > starting a discussion. :-) Have to disagree, BEER IS FAR MORE IMPORTANT, especially as it's fast approaching 'Fasching' (some people would say 'carneval', but that's more northern), here in the Black Forest. >> It still seems to me that cheating on a part of the code, but not the >> other part is a bit screwy :-) > > We have too few maintainers for the avr port, and the rest of us are > grateful to them, but not enough to compete for the job of making a good > tool "perfect". Oh, and I wonder if there are more little corner cases > than we would like to tackle. Fully agree > It doesn't do any harm to keep one's assembler skills honed, and the > ISRs are usually short enough to be easily done, barring surprises. Ditto Cheers Erik, Bob _______________________________________________ AVR-chat mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-chat
