On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 09:49:09AM +0200, Oliver Schmidt wrote: > I would opt - as always - for dynamic runtime checking of the OS running on. > But I'm quite sure that Ullrich won't like that - as always - because of the > C library blow-up ;-) If I hear the complaints that not enough memory is available to run a flash plugin for Contiki, I think that my concerns about code size are justified, aren't they? :-) > Another target would mean no ProDOS support for the 6502 machines - wouldn't > it? See my library proposal in the other mail. Would it be possible to separate the code so cleanly that using two or more disk I/O libs could solve the problem? There can be references from the main code into the disk I/O libraries, but the interface needs to be the same for all of them. Since using constructors for initialization is also an option, I think this should work (provided that the linker is able to handle it). Regards Uz -- Ullrich von Bassewitz uz@musoftware.de ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Thu Jul 29 09:54:15 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2004-07-29 09:54:23 CEST