| ??? 02/06/06 07:55 Read: times |
#109275 - Sorry Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Maarten,
I feel sorry but I overestimated myself. I don't think I will be able to understand nor compile anything such complicated as the SDCC package is. It's simply out of scale for me. I had a look at the peephole optimisation rules, that's really nice, but the trouble is that there is no need for peephole optimisation unless I know what sort of code is it generating, and I don't think I am able to guess that. Plus a really minor problem: I am also in big dislike with CVS, started several times but no go - I hate it and it hates me, obviously :-) Well, had too big expectations and failed this, but that happens to me not too rarely... Jan Waclawek |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| GNU gcc compiler for 8052 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sdcc | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| And never will be | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Hmm well | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Stack Size | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Is it so because.. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| processors supported by gcc | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The reason... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| bigstack | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Probably not | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Bigger Stack | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| how much is enough? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Who? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| but who??? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| SDCC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| only preprocessor | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Successful? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| routinely | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The AVR tinys have no ram | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Not me | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Wheel re-invention | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I suppose | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sdcc - where to start | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Thanks | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Sorry | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No stack required | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| reentrancy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The right tool for the job | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: The right tool for the job | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Good point | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ... but who cares, anyway? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Sad, but true! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not convincing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| have been designed to fit C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| it IS relevant | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not rteally | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| choices | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ...and Pascal | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| If you are planning to make 1.000.000 un | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Choices | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| naah... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yup | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| oh $8 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I don't buy that one | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
you have to work with what you get | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Even assembler needs justification | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| you DID use the %! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| as to above | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| tradeoffs | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I'd buy Keil if I had to make 2 units | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| my original point was... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Dan, you missed a detail :) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| In good company | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| deadlines | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| assumptions | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| could not say it better | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Nothing new there, then! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| oh well, more words | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Normal | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| have a look | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| yes, but most want their tool | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I dont know where to reply! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| as so often before | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Seen it so many times | 01/01/70 00:00 |