https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116433
--- Comment #4 from C.F. <digger1984 at gmx dot com> --- (In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #3) > EEPROM handling is too complicated, we don't want > /that/ code in the compiler and support > 300 devices where each one might > need different SFR handling. Out of curiosity I'd like to know and understand why it is complicated. I'm not questioning it is, I'd really like to understand why it is so. Explained in laymans' terms, preferably. Also, are you talking about just AVR (which is relevant to this bug and duplicates I suppose)? Or are you talking more in the general sense? > When you want EEPROM support, you can just wrap routines from AVR-LibC. Well, that precisely *is* what I had wished I could avoid and make EEPROM storage transparent, looking like accessing ordinary variables using a bit of "C++ magic". I guess I'm back to the drawing board then...
