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

[Jan Waclawek]

>I am really not sure. There is no read use of such a type, it's just because
>some guys are to lazy to type some letters. Moreover in the case of pointers,
>you have the difference between pointers, const pointers, pointers to const and
>const pointers to const etc. and all for arbitrary number of types and other
>qualifiers like volatile, signed or unsigned.
>
>For the matter of clearness I'd discourage such code obfuscation, there is no
>real benefit.


Couldn't the same be said of *any* typedef? Or macro? Or, for that matter, 
functions, which too serve to spare some typing and potentially obfuscate 
things?

JW