Re: [sdcc-devel] Getting rid of the non-standard-compliant sdcc keywords

[Maarten B. <sou...@ds...>]

They can go as far as I'm concerned.

How about _asm and _endasm? I'd say remove them too.

Maarten

> Is it time to finally get rid of at, bit, code, critical, data, far,
> eeprom, fixed16x16 flash idata, interrupt, nonbanked, banked, near,
> pdata, reentrant, shadowregs, wparam, sfr, sfr16, sfr32, sbit, sram,
> using, _naked, xdata, _overlay? They have been deprected for a while
> (sometime in between 2.9.0 and 3.0.0), giving a warning recommending to
> use the standard-compliant variants. They are still a source of annoying
> problems (people using them as identifiers), especially for newbies and
> when compiling third-party code not originally written for sdcc. If no
> one speaks up to save them, I'd remove them soon, so they are gone for
> the 3.2.0 release.
>
> Philipp