Re: [cc65] Optimization for size

From: Andrew J. Kroll <forge1dr.ea.ms>
Date: 2006-04-08 02:50:37
> 
> On Thursday 06 April 2006 14:11, Oliver Schmidt wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > However, the approach is beyond what would normally be done by a
> > > compiler, because to generate an optimal set of patterns, you will have
> > > to look at all assembly files for a complete project, not just at one
> > > module (as the compiler does).
> >
> > BTW, more recent MS compiler offer 'link time code generation' (LTCG),
> > which means that the object files generated by calling the compiler only
> > contain some compiler-internal representation and that the linker calls the
> > compiler backend just-in-time to generate the actual code - and here
> > cross-module inlining etc. is performed.
> 
> sounds like something that can be added to cc65 easily :=D
> 


.byte in OPTIML anyone? :-)
Could also expand the flex rules for more peep-hole optimizations as well.


BTW, tested OPTIML on contiki with my original ruleset.
It shows savings of ram. I tested that contiki "works" on the 64 on vice...
This is not to say it actually works, etc, but it does not crash now that
I have gotten the bugs out of the flex module. I realize not everyone can 
force flex to accept the large amount of rules, and I will work on a 
solution to that as it is next on my TODO. :-)

Results can be seen (and a pre-compiled copntiki tree found) at 

http://dr.ea.ms/~oldfart/optimlresults/

Yours,
-- 
Andrew J. Kroll
Software and Hardware Engineer and Consultant
Grafixoft http://dr.ea.ms/HW/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
Received on Sat Apr 8 02:50:49 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2006-04-08 02:50:52 CEST