gnupic: Re: [gnupic] sdcc versus ccs
Subject:
RE: [gnupic] sdcc versus ccs
From:
Chen Xiao Fan ####@####.####
Date:
20 Jul 2005 06:17:47 +0100
Message-Id: <3B8AEFFADD3DD4118F8100508BACEC2C07F7738F@spex>
That is a lot. What is the code? CCS is known to be less efficient
than Hitech PICC so it will be even worse compare to PICC18.
If the code is related to serial communication or LCD stuff
(like printf) I think it is not that critical to me. Perhaps
it is a library problem.
Regards,
Xiaofan
-----Original Message-----
From: David McNab ####@####.####
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 9:57 PM
To: GnuPic
Subject: [gnupic] sdcc versus ccs
Hi,
I compiled and built the same program on both sdcc and ccs C compilers,
both targetting pic18f452.
The sdcc version produced a binary size of 7260 bytes.
Compared to ccs's 1236 bytes.
Sizes differing by a factor of almost 6 times!!!
Guess I might be putting my sdcc experiments on hold for a while.
--
Cheers
David
