>> The PORTA bits are used for hardware control. I want to use the >> atan2(), etc. calls as pulse stretching. >> >> Then I recommend using the calls in <util/delay.h> to get exact delays >> instead of monkeying around with floating point routine calls. >> They'll be a lot more exact as well as being a boatlad smaller! > >Perhaps the atan2() call are accomplishing useful work...
Perhaps so. However, if all they are doing is "pulse stretching" as was indicated, a flat delay is better. That said, I thought the OP was originally using the PORTA bit flipping as a simple way to time how long each given function takes, perhaps as a calibration or benchmarking exercise. I found the fact that sin, cos, and so on worked, but atan2 didn't, the most interesting part of the discussion. And I think the answer to that has been adequately explained (look-up tables not affecting volatility, etc.). Then we branched off into whether "clobber memory" is the best way to handle sei() and cli(). Again, a fun discussion. Enough explanation of my comments. Back to the argument, which is already in progress... ;-) Stu _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
