On 20 April 2016 at 06:39, Kustaa Nyholm wrote:
>>The compiler can still do computations using the max
>>precision fp type it has
>
> Perhaps, but depending on the hypothetical libraries and
> hypothetical algorithms and rounding rules computing
>
> at max precisions might not produce exactly same
>The compiler can still do computations using the max
>precision fp type it has
Perhaps, but depending on the hypothetical libraries and
hypothetical algorithms and rounding rules computing
at max precisions might not produce exactly same results.
Don't know for sure as I'm no expert on the intr
On 19 April 2016 at 23:16, Nick Hill wrote:
> #define THERMISTOR_BETA 3380
> #define THERMISTOR_R0 1
> #define THERMISTOR_T0 (298.15)
> #define Rinf (THERMISTOR_R0*pow(2.718,(-1*(THERMISTOR_BETA/THERMISTOR_T0
>
> With Cosmic compiler, any reference to Rinf pulls a large chunk of
> math lib
>However, just a few days ago we discussed
>various floating point formats and one of them
>was to leave the actual computations to the FP
>library, which would make it hard for the compiler
>to optimise these as it could not call those functions
>at compile time.
>This is pretty trivial to optimiz
On 19 April 2016 at 16:50, Maarten Brock wrote:
> What kind of 'functions' are you talking about here? SDCC uses functions
> even for 'normal' operations like multiplication and addition at runtime.
> I would expect these to be optimised out, but not the functions from e.g.
> math.h.
>
> float a
On 19 April 2016 at 19:53, Georg Icking-Konert wrote:
> Hi Nick,
>
> I totally agree that the SPL headers (and functions) are not very
> convenient. However, "unfortunately“...
Hi Georg,
Agreed. The frustrations I felt caused me to write an angry letter to
ST product manager, but in the end I de
>perhaps there is some technical or
>historical precedent for this?
Most likely just a matter of priority.
However, just a few days ago we discussed
various floating point formats and one of them
was to leave the actual computations to the FP
library, which would make it hard for the compiler
to
Hi Nick,
I totally agree that the SPL headers (and functions) are not very convenient.
However, "unfortunately“ there are a lot of examples on the ST homepage for the
STM8 which are based on the SPL…
> Has someone already released fine grained SDCC compatible header
> files for the STM8?
Due
On 19.04.2016 17:21, Nick Hill wrote:
> On 19 April 2016 at 08:15, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
>
>> While SDCC has different optimizations from Cosmic, and in some cases
>> will optimize better or worse than Cosmic, in this case it probably
>> won't matter much. SDCC does not currently optimize c
> On 19 April 2016 at 08:15, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
>
>> While SDCC has different optimizations from Cosmic, and in some cases
>> will optimize better or worse than Cosmic, in this case it probably
>> won't matter much. SDCC does not currently optimize calls to float
>> functions with constan
On 19 April 2016 at 08:15, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
> While SDCC has different optimizations from Cosmic, and in some cases
> will optimize better or worse than Cosmic, in this case it probably
> won't matter much. SDCC does not currently optimize calls to float
> functions with constant argum
Thank you for the interesting replies. It looks like things are moving
in the right direction.
I have linked the SPL to my projects, but somewhat half-heartedly
since it doesn't tend to resolve to register bits.
I would rather do something like:
while (!CLK.ICKR.HSIRDY);
instead of:
while ((CLK_I
On 18.04.2016 22:58, Nick Hill wrote:
>
> I don't believe the Cosmic compiler free version is supposed to lack
> optimisation found on the paid for version. However, I'm not
> particularly impressed with the Cosmic compiler since I have defined a
> constant expression featuring a raised to the po
On 18.04.2016 22:58, Nick Hill wrote:
> Hi All.
>
> I have recently re-entered the world of micro programming with both
> STM8 and PIC.
>
> I found the move from PC a little difficult since there seems to be a
> range of proprietary headers which published code tends to be written
> for. It is of
On 18.04.2016 22:58, Nick Hill wrote:
> I have had to start re-factoring some code in my header file, and find
> the ST header files broadly incompatible with SDCC. Where do I go from
> here? Has someone already released fine grained SDCC compatible header
> files for the STM8?
By "ST header file
Hi All.
I have recently re-entered the world of micro programming with both
STM8 and PIC.
I found the move from PC a little difficult since there seems to be a
range of proprietary headers which published code tends to be written
for. It is often not even clear which header files code is written
16 matches
Mail list logo
