gnupic: Re: [gnupic] gputils development


Previous by date: 14 Nov 2008 05:37:43 -0000 Re: [gnupic] gputils development, David Barnett
Next by date: 14 Nov 2008 05:37:43 -0000 LLVM - was Re: [gnupic] gputils development, Vaclav Peroutka
Previous in thread: 14 Nov 2008 05:37:43 -0000 Re: [gnupic] gputils development, David Barnett
Next in thread: 14 Nov 2008 05:37:43 -0000 Re: [gnupic] gputils development, David Barnett

Subject: Re: [gnupic] gputils development
From: "Xiaofan Chen" ####@####.####
Date: 14 Nov 2008 05:37:43 -0000
Message-Id: <a276da400811132136n678e34f1v73d5fcde55c46c63@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:15 AM, David Barnett ####@####.#### wrote:
> BTW Xiaofan, I think gputils could help with some problems that seem like
> they're SDCC-only. For instance, a lot of people hesitate to use C because
> of the code bloat, and SDCC doesn't do a ton of optimization compared to the
> alternatives, but some link-time optimizations could really cut down on the
> bloat.

That is a good idea. But IMHO Microchip has other ideas about
this topic. They are working on LLVM port. In fact, LLVM 2.4
has experimental PIC16 ports.
http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html

Check out LLVM mailing lists and you will know that several
Microchip employees are working on the PIC16 port.

Xiaofan

Previous by date: 14 Nov 2008 05:37:43 -0000 Re: [gnupic] gputils development, David Barnett
Next by date: 14 Nov 2008 05:37:43 -0000 LLVM - was Re: [gnupic] gputils development, Vaclav Peroutka
Previous in thread: 14 Nov 2008 05:37:43 -0000 Re: [gnupic] gputils development, David Barnett
Next in thread: 14 Nov 2008 05:37:43 -0000 Re: [gnupic] gputils development, David Barnett


Powered by ezmlm-browse 0.20.