Hi, > i have to agree with that. cc65 is especially useful for large projects, where > you'd typically want as much (linear) memory as possible. it should also get > optimized for the worst case, not the optimal case. it doesnt really matter at > all if hello world is 100ms slower, or 100 bytes longer. Full ACK. >> Regarding the memory: You could as well argue that for a small program >> it is only a marginal issue to be a little bigger while for large >> programs it is a showstopper to not fit into memory. > > on top of that, speed is almost never an issue. (once you hit a speed critical > path using a few bits of assembler will likely do more good than any compiler > optimization could ever do) Again full ACK. Contiki does TCP checksum calculation in assembler. Relatively small effort. Contiki not fitting into memory means to rewrite large portions in assembler. Not feasable. Regards, Oliver ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Wed Feb 13 23:55:46 2013
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2013-02-13 23:55:50 CET