Carsten Bager wrote: >> It's not the keyword that is the problem. The whole logic for this would >> have to be implemented. Think switches, commands to the linker, a way >> to >> configure the name for the segment etc. Part of this is specific for >> your >> device setup. >> >> If writable const is off, also variables declared with CONST could be >> put in >> a different segment. There is no need to invent new syntax. >> >> However all the linker stuff should be implemented by sb who has such a >> device and the interest to work on it. > > Why not just drop static constants in the Text (Code) segment. I have > seen other compilers do that. This will not involve any change of the > interface with the linker (That is what I am doing now in a separate > assembler file). > On the other hand I am already using a configuration file for the > linker. (Where to place Stack, data code etc.) I assume that it would > be easy to take care of an extra segment in the linker configuration > file.
I might be completely wrong, but I suspect it isn't such an easy decision (as a general rule at least). Some CPUs/platforms might not allow data access in TEXT (code) segment at all. I don't know whether this is the case for any of our currently supported platforms (I surely know that it is _not_ the case for x86 at least ;-) and I guess the same is true for ARM if you're doing it right now), but it might be (either now or in future). Tomas _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
