Preston Wilson wrote:
I'm pretty sure this is not an issue (anymore, at least). I could be
wrong. The recently-added PIC port of LLVM would be a good
place to start
looking.
Ummm... are you sure they mean PIC as in a processor from Microchip, or
do they mean PIC as in Position Independent Code?
That particular collision in the acronym name space is a frequent cause
of confusion among embedded developers....
They have both. Most references are to the position independent code type,
but under "the new features" link near the top right hand side of the main
page. It includes this statement:
"LLVM 2.4 also includes an initial port for the PIC16 microprocessor.
OK, just checking :) I've seen people trip over that before...
This
target only has support for 8 bit registers, and a number of other crazy
constraints. While the port is still in early development stages, it shows
some interesting things you can do with LLVM."
Hmmm... even if nobody in the AVR world has time right now to devote to
actually doing an AVR back end, it might be worthwhile (and entertaining
as well :) to follow along on the dev e-mail list and ask: "Have you
thought about how you would handle <foo>?" every once in a while. That
might be just enough to drive the infrastructure in a good direction.
Also... I suspect that I am like many others here, I want to do AVR
work, and patching the tools is a side effect. However, LLVM probably
has it's share of compiler geeks hanging around looking for an
interesting challenge. Maybe we can bait (did I say that?) one of those
folks into adopting the AVR, simply because it is an intellectually
interesting puzzle.
-dave
-Preston
_______________________________________________
AVR-GCC-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
