Re: [avr-libc-dev] Progmem types compatibility

[David Brown]

On 10/01/2012 09:08, Joerg Wunsch wrote:
> As Jan Waclawek wrote:
>
> > Just want to remark that these issues had been discussed already in
> > the thread stemming from
> > http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/avr-libc-dev/2011-09/msg00025.html
> > ...
>
> And the outcome was that the macro solution is not really suitable
> as a replacement.  To quote Johann:
>
> > prog_char as a macro is dreaded.
>
> > const prog_char * const p = NULL;
>
> > puts p in progmem so it's broken by design. With that users will be
> > taken for a ride.

Fair enough.  Macros are better for some purposes, but they can really 
mess things up sometimes.  I can't see any way to get the effect you want.

> I agree that having typedefs for the named address space
> implementation might be a good thing.  They should probably start
> with flash_ (rather than prog_) then, to clearly indicate they are
> *different*, and need a different usage.

That would be ideal, as far as I can see.

mvh.,

David