RE: rewriting JPIC14

Eur, Stef, any other interested parties,

Eur :
If the experienced jallist reader reads this: what do you prefer? 
INTCON_GIE or
intcon_gie or GIE or gie? I prefer INTCON_GIE because that is the 
closest match
to the old JPIC and the datasheet. Should I include GIE too? Should 
ALL the
bits in the datasheet be included in the library?

Stef:
What about naming ??

Are you planning official Microchip names, Wouter's name or ....
PORTA or PORT_A etc.
TMR1L or f877_tmr1l etc.
C or status_C etc.
GIE or INTCON_GIE etc.

Myself I would like naming to be as close to Microchip official names 
and would also like to see all bits included for all registers etc.

I realize this would be major rewrite of jpicXX (think it would good 
to do this on all jpic libs), but why have a jpic675, jpic628, etc, 
when conditional code could allow 1 library with all periphrials and 
registers included. This would make things much simpler. Combine the 
various jpic libs scattered around the JAL community into 2 libs 
jpic14 & jpic16.

Mike