Bob von Knobloch <[email protected]> wrote:

> While this seems to be 'more correct', it seems a large change from
> previous versions.

Actually, GCC not insisting on a flash object being "const" before has
been a bug (which simply nobody noticed before).  That bug had to be
fixed in order for Johann to be able to implement the new __flash
named address space.

It's an unfortunate side-effect of fixing bugs that the fix sometimes
breaks code that used to work in the past.

On the pro side, the __flash named address space is something we've
not even dared thinking about in GCC some ten years ago.
-- 
cheers, Joerg               .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)

_______________________________________________
AVR-chat mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-chat

Reply via email to