Re: [avr-gcc-list] avr-gcc/avr-binutils/avr-libc and the ATMega168 - what am I doing wrong, tnx!

[Erik Walthinsen]

E. Weddington wrote:
> Go look at the implementation of the sbi and cbi macros and you'll see 
> why. ;-)

#define cbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) &= ~_BV(bit))
#define sbi(sfr, bit) (_SFR_BYTE(sfr) |= _BV(bit))

Yes, I understand that it seems to be a big deal that the compiler is 
now smart enough to interpret

DDRB &= ~(1<<4);
PORTB |= (1<<4);

but I really think that

cbi(DDRB,4);
sbi(PORTB,4);

is vastly easier to understand when both reading and writing code, those 
being functions of humans, not compilers.  If there is no other reason 
than showing off a smart compiler, I fail to understand why removing 
exceedingly useful *convenience* macros that make the code several times 
easier to read is a good thing.

Again, I don't get it.  And it really annoys me, as I am being forced to 
include my own deprecated.h in every one of my existing projects.


FWIW, I am unable to send *any* mail to avr1.org, as per:

----- Transcript of session follows -----
<address@hidden>... Deferred: Connection refused by avr1.org.
Warning: message still undelivered after 4 hours
...
Reporting-MTA: dns; mail.omegacs.net

mail.omegacs.net is 216.99.212.251, a home DSL connection that's been 
otherwise handling mail properly for 5+ years.  Can the owner of 
avr1.org's mail server please check to see if something's wrong? 
Especially since I can ping 202.37.230.18 just fine from here.