Hi,
I agree what you mention are valuable reasons.
and I don't have time either :(
Why not file a GSoC project to enhance this port LOL?
Sebastien
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Jan Waclawek wrote:
> Value of AVR port of SDCC would be the significantly higher flexibility of
> SDCC than GCC,
Value of AVR port of SDCC would be the significantly higher flexibility of SDCC
than GCC, in more then one aspect.
While avr-gcc one one side enjoys the massive investment of various companies
into GCC, e.g. through the aggressive early optimisations, it also suffers from
GCC being targeted pri
And WinAVR integrates pretty nicely into AVR studio I have used it several
times with good results.
Brian K. Mohlman
Principal Engineer Electrical – Controls
Advanced Technology & Application Engineering
JLG Industries Inc.
1 JLG Drive
McConnellsburg, PA. 17233
Ph. (717) 485-6495
mailto:bkmohl..
Most probably because nobody was interested in taking up the challenge of
completing and maintaining it. Underlying reason is probably the existence
of avr-gcc.
Maarten
> But why AVR was abandoned?
> It is a polular kind of MCU.
>
>> On 10/12/10 9:13 AM, Claude Sylvain wrote:
>> > >I no
Because GCC port for AVR exists and is supported. Please try google.com.
>
> But why AVR was abandoned?
> It is a polular kind of MCU.
>
> > On 10/12/10 9:13 AM, Claude Sylvain wrote:
> > > >I notice that the avr branch and z80 branch would not b
Quoth Bin Shi at 2010-10-13 11:50...
> But why AVR was abandoned?
> It is a polular kind of MCU.
AVR has avr-gcc - supporting it with SDCC would be a duplication of effort.
--
Matthew Smith
Smiffytech - Technology Consulting & Web Application Development
Business: http://www.smiffytech.com/
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Bin Shi wrote:
> But why AVR was abandoned?
> It is a popular kind of MCU.
Because GCC for AVR is way better than sdcc for AVR. If you
can use gcc for 8051 and PIC12/16/18 and have good result,
you can abandon sdcc as well for 8051 and PIC12/16/18.
Unfortunately t
But why AVR was abandoned?
It is a polular kind of MCU.
> On 10/12/10 9:13 AM, Claude Sylvain wrote:
> > >I notice that the avr branch and z80 branch would not be
> > maintained.
> > >
> >
> > - Refering to the SDCC web page, this is the AVR and gbz80 ports that
are no
> > longer m
On 10/12/10 9:13 AM, Claude Sylvain wrote:
> >I notice that the avr branch and z80 branch would not be
> maintained.
> >
>
> - Refering to the SDCC web page, this is the AVR and gbz80 ports that are no
> longer maintained.
> Z80 port is still alive :-)
That is a relief, I'm
On 12/10/2010 3:19, Bin Shi wrote:
>
> I notice that the avr branch and z80 branch would not be
maintained.
>
- Refering to the SDCC web page, this is the AVR and gbz80 ports that are no
longer maintained.
Z80 port is still alive :-)
Claude
-
> I would like to use SDCC in my project and the MCU of my board is
>AVR(ATmega8).
> I notice that the avr branch and z80 branch would not be maintained.
> But how is the quality of code generated by avr branch now?
Critically bad :-)
The AVR branch was abandoned before getting i
Hello,
I would like to use SDCC in my project and the MCU of my board is
AVR(ATmega8).
I notice that the avr branch and z80 branch would not be maintained.
But how is the quality of code generated by avr branch now?
12 matches
Mail list logo