Re: [cc65] scanf ?

Date view Thread view Subject view

From: troy silvey (tbsilvey_at_juno.com)
Date: 2001-02-23 22:56:48


>The 8K number for scanf is just an estimate for a first version 
>written completely in C. It's based on the fact that scanf is even more 
>complex than printf. But it's an estimate and it may be wrong. It may
also be 
>possible to get lower numbers by size optimizations or a rewrite in
assembler, but 
>I won't do that for the first version. It is usually easier to rewrite 
>existing C code in assembler, than to write it in assembler from
scratch.


I appreciate the effort. For now I am happy to use getchar and I am
happy with the executable size. If it's possible to add scanf at a 
small price in size that would be nice. But since we are coding
for native systems like the C64 that only have about 40k
immediatly available (more with tweeking) I think you made the
right choice going with the smaller choices. I think for curiosity
I will try to rewrite my code using putchar instead of printf and
see how that effects the size and speed.

troy

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo_at_musoftware.de with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.


Date view Thread view Subject view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : 2001-12-14 22:05:39 CET