Hi Dan, > ... This is much faster and > often smaller than using the C stack. Since the default > maximum usage is only 6 bytes per function, this is unlikely > to cause stack overflow issues. an optimization I was thinking about some time ago, was an alternative C stack model were the additional stack is limited to 256 bytes and Y is the stack pointer. The 256 bytes would be enough for many projects and this feature could also reduce the size of the code and increase speed. But since many functions of the runtime package have to be rewritten I rescheduled further estimations into the future. I though about macro functions in two flavors: One set for the classic stack and one set for the 'quick'-stack. Stack pushing and poping would be done by using one specific set of macros which could by choosed project dependent (user setting). And the runtime parts would supplied in both forms (each assembled with the specific macro set)... What do you think about this proposal? chrisker ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Jun 28 11:50:20 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2007-06-28 11:50:23 CEST