gnupic@linuxhacker.org

I appreciate that the code generated by the compiler is likely to be 
less efficient than hand-crafted code, at least with simple processor 
architectures (complex RISC processors like the PowerPC often end up 
with superior code from a compiler). In an ideal world, the compiler 
would generate code just as tight as my original.

However, I'm willing to forego the code size expansion, so long as the 
generated code is correct. That is, in this particular case, the 
looping construct should check T0IF each time through the loop, which 
the generated assembly does not seem to do (it seems only to check it 
on entry to the loop).

So, really what I'm trying to do is get a sense of the limits of the 
PIC port of SDCC, to know what I can expect to accomplish with it.


On Saturday, September 27, 2003, at 04:59 AM, Ian Bell wrote:

> This really does illustrate the problems faced by the developers of 
> compilers
> for small micros.  This sort of function is so hardware intimate that 
> it
> really should be coded in assembler even if the rest of the code is 
> written
> in a HLL.  It really is asking too much of any compiler to even come 
> close to
> your original for this sort of function.
-- 
Rick