Since SDCC supports Zilog chipset very well, why not switch from ZDS-II to
> SDCC?
>
SDCC supports z80 and z180 but none of the other ZiLOG chipsets. ez80 has
an unverified GCC port but ZDS-II is the only compiler option for the
remaining parts.
See http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/
> > compiler.h
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 5:30 PM Sebastien Lorquet
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> That would be -1 for me too.
>
> Reason 1 from Nathan could change my vote.
>
> But reason 2 would be a shame. We have one of the few a RTOS that
> support CPUs outside ARM.
>
>
> TBH, there is no solid technical reason to change
On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 3:39 AM Gregory Nutt wrote:
> Yes. 2.95
>
>
> > > Classic Z80 is probably not viable due to the 64Kb address limitation
> but
> > > is still relevant for Z80 derived parts with MMUs such as Z180 and the
> ZX
> > > Spectrum Next or with wider address buses such as the eZ80.
Yes. 2.95
> > Classic Z80 is probably not viable due to the 64Kb address limitation but
> > is still relevant for Z80 derived parts with MMUs such as Z180 and the ZX
> > Spectrum Next or with wider address buses such as the eZ80. z8 was never
> > well tested. But eZ80 and ZNEO have been importa
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 10:43 PM Gregory Nutt wrote:
> > Just FYI, based on what Byron points out with regard to the Zilog
> families needing C89 (and possibly other archs that weren't mentioned), I
> would probably vote -1 unless...
>
> There have been several other cases over the years where th
> Just FYI, based on what Byron points out with regard to the Zilog
families needing C89 (and possibly other archs that weren't mentioned), I
would probably vote -1 unless...
There have been several other cases over the years where there were ports
to classic architectures no longer supported by c
-1 for the same reasons
On Tue, 30 Aug 2022, 11:30 Sebastien Lorquet, wrote:
> Hi,
>
> That would be -1 for me too.
>
> Reason 1 from Nathan could change my vote.
>
> But reason 2 would be a shame. We have one of the few a RTOS that
> support CPUs outside ARM.
>
>
> TBH, there is no solid techni
Hi,
That would be -1 for me too.
Reason 1 from Nathan could change my vote.
But reason 2 would be a shame. We have one of the few a RTOS that
support CPUs outside ARM.
TBH, there is no solid technical reason to change this rule. Most of the
things mentioned in this comment are syntactic su
