From: Royce & S. P. <be...@im...> - 2002-04-24 08:56:29
|
Hi Bernhard, ----- Original Message ----- From: Bernhard Held <ber...@be...> To: Royce & Sharal Pereira <be...@im...>; SDCC list <sdc...@li...> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 7:48 PM Subject: Re: [Sdcc-user] SDCC v 2.3.0 > Why do you still use HTML? I dont understand this question? > Why don't you use 2.3.1? I'd love to. Where may I download Win32 executable binaries of 2.3.1? > Do you take care of my answers? > (Or: should I take care of your questions?) > > Bernhard Thanks, --Royce. |
From: Royce & S. P. <be...@im...> - 2002-04-26 09:14:39
|
Dear Bernhard, Yes I did go to the page you gave me, but I was confused with all those many files, & I also assumed they were Linux compatible only. Anyways, today I did download what I thought to be the latest build of 2.3.1, & now my problem's gone ! V2.3.1 works fine, thanks!! Some questions, though: Some overhead code is generated by _sdcc_init_data which was not there in earlier versions. What does this code do? __sdcc_init_data: ; _mcs51_genXINIT() start mov a,#l_XINIT orl a,#l_XINIT>>8 jz 00003$ mov a,#s_XINIT add a,#l_XINIT mov r1,a mov a,#s_XINIT>>8 addc a,#l_XINIT>>8... etc.... Thanks, ---Royce. |
From: Bernhard H. <ber...@be...> - 2002-04-26 10:01:58
|
> V2.3.1 works fine, thanks!! Ufff :-) > Some overhead code is generated by _sdcc_init_data which was not there in > earlier versions. What does this code do? > > __sdcc_init_data: > ; _mcs51_genXINIT() start > mov a,#l_XINIT > orl a,#l_XINIT>>8 > jz 00003$ > mov a,#s_XINIT > add a,#l_XINIT > mov r1,a > mov a,#s_XINIT>>8 > addc a,#l_XINIT>>8... etc.... This initializes data in XRAM at startup. If you define e.g. xdata char str[] = "This is a real long and boring text!"; SDCC 2.3.0 generated very inefficient code: mov dptr,#_str mov a,#0x54 movx @dptr,a mov dptr,#(_str + 0x0001) mov a,#0x68 movx @dptr,a mov dptr,#(_str + 0x0002) ... SDCC 2.3.1 gathers these data in special segments, so that it can be initialized in a short., efficient loop. Bernhard |
From: Royce & S. P. <be...@im...> - 2002-04-29 22:19:58
|
Dear Bernhard, ----- Original Message ----- From: Bernhard Held <ber...@be...> To: Royce & Sharal Pereira <be...@im...>; SDCC list <sdc...@li...> Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 3:31 PM Subject: Re: [Sdcc-user] SDCC v 2.3.0 > > addc a,#l_XINIT>>8... etc.... > > This initializes data in XRAM at startup. If you define e.g. > > xdata char str[] = "This is a real long and boring text!"; > > SDCC 2.3.0 generated very inefficient code: > > mov dptr,#_str > mov a,#0x54 > movx @dptr,a > mov dptr,#(_str + 0x0001) > mov a,#0x68 > movx @dptr,a > mov dptr,#(_str + 0x0002) > ... > > SDCC 2.3.1 gathers these data in special segments, so that it can be > initialized in a short., efficient loop. Is there any documentation on this? I dont have Xram, so will the code still be generated?(Why?) What is the value of l_XINIT , s_XINIT etc? Who initialises them? Thanks, ---Royce. |
From: Sandeep D. <sa...@wi...> - 2002-04-29 22:37:30
|
>> What is the value of l_XINIT , s_XINIT etc? Who initialises them? The linker does. Johan added this cool feature, I think he also added an ENVIRONMENT Variable to disable it, not quite sure what it is called. Sandeep _______________________________________________ Sdcc-user mailing list Sdc...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sdcc-user |
From: Royce & S. P. <be...@im...> - 2002-04-30 02:30:37
|
Dear Bernhard, ----- Original Message ----- From: Bernhard Held <ber...@be...> To: Royce & Sharal Pereira <be...@im...>; SDCC list <sdc...@li...> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 3:20 PM Subject: Re: [Sdcc-user] SDCC v 2.3.0 > > > Why do you still use HTML? > > > > I dont understand this question? > Your email is in HTML-format. Please choose text-format in Outlook Express. > See: http://www.darkmountain.com/netiquette/e-mail.html Ok, I understand ;)...it's Plain text now I hope! > > > Why don't you use 2.3.1? > > > > I'd love to. Where may I download Win32 executable binaries of 2.3.1? > ???? Only 9 days ago: > http://www.geocrawler.com/lists/3/SourceForge/3278/0/8393328/ > http://www.geocrawler.com/lists/3/SourceForge/3278/0/8393493/ Yes I did go to the page you gave me, but I was confused with all those many files, & I also assumed they were Linux compatible only. Anyways, today I did download what I thought to be the latest build of 2.3.1, & now my problem's gone ! V2.3.1 works fine, thanks!! Some questions, though: Some overhead code is generated by _sdcc_init_data which was not there in earlier versions. What does this code do? __sdcc_init_data: ; _mcs51_genXINIT() start mov a,#l_XINIT orl a,#l_XINIT>>8 jz 00003$ mov a,#s_XINIT add a,#l_XINIT mov r1,a mov a,#s_XINIT>>8 addc a,#l_XINIT>>8... etc.... |
From: Bernhard H. <ber...@be...> - 2002-04-24 09:50:26
|
> > Why do you still use HTML? > > I dont understand this question? Your email is in HTML-format. Please choose text-format in Outlook Express. See: http://www.darkmountain.com/netiquette/e-mail.html > > Why don't you use 2.3.1? > > I'd love to. Where may I download Win32 executable binaries of 2.3.1? ???? Only 9 days ago: http://www.geocrawler.com/lists/3/SourceForge/3278/0/8393328/ http://www.geocrawler.com/lists/3/SourceForge/3278/0/8393493/ > >Do you take care of my answers? No, obviously not :-( Bernhard |
From: Peter B. <alt...@go...> - 2002-04-24 11:36:16
|
Hi, > > > Why don't you use 2.3.1? Does it mean, the v2.3.1 is "official" now? > > I'd love to. Where may I download Win32 executable binaries of 2.3.1? > ???? Only 9 days ago: > http://www.geocrawler.com/lists/3/SourceForge/3278/0/8393328/ > http://www.geocrawler.com/lists/3/SourceForge/3278/0/8393493/ --> http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/snap.php Perhaps, the question was: how many/which snapshots to download for the complete v2.3.1? The latest I can see is 20020315, without e.g. sdcc(.exe) in /bin. Just another question: where/how can I download the source for v2.3.1, if there's no cvs (and network itself) on machine where I should build and use it. Peter |
From: Bernhard H. <ber...@be...> - 2002-04-24 13:06:45
|
> Does it mean, the v2.3.1 is "official" now? The last "official release" is 2.3.0. But I nearly always recommend using the newest version. Again lots of bugs have been fixed, and code quality has improved too since 2.3.0. > --> http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/snap.php > > Perhaps, the question was: how many/which snapshots to download for > the complete v2.3.1? The latest I can see is 20020315, without e.g. > sdcc(.exe) in /bin. Looking at the filesize the last complete mingw32-snapshot seems to be 20020301. This snapshot is nearly up to date, because there have been only a few changes in CVS since this date (except z80-port). I don't know what's the problem with the nightly build and regression test. Maybe Michael could have a look at it? > Just another question: where/how can I download the source for v2.3.1, > if there's no cvs (and network itself) on machine where I should build > and use it. Hmm. No cvs, no internet, but you want the most recent SDCC. That's not easy! What kind of services can you use? http, ftp, ssh? Bernhard |
From: Aurelien J. <aur...@au...> - 2002-04-24 16:34:53
|
Le Mercredi 24 Avril 2002 15:06, vous avez écrit : > > Does it mean, the v2.3.1 is "official" now? > > The last "official release" is 2.3.0. But I nearly always recommend > using the newest version. Again lots of bugs have been fixed, and code > quality has improved too since 2.3.0. > > Bernhard Hello, I am the maintainer of the Debian SDCC package. The current version in Debian is the official release 2.3.0. The version 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 are not "officials release", but can they be considered stable ? And compared to the 2.3.0 ? If it is the case, it is possible to obtain not the latest CVS code but the version 2.3.1 or 2.3.2 (source) easily ? Aurelien |
From: Bernhard H. <ber...@be...> - 2002-04-25 07:21:44
|
> I am the maintainer of the Debian SDCC package. The current version in > Debian is the official release 2.3.0. > The version 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 are not "officials release", but can they be > considered stable ? And compared to the 2.3.0 ? 2.3.1 is stable. It's even more stable than ever before. But the documentation is again outdated. IMHO there should be no newer package than 2.3.0 in a distribution, until the docs are fixed. 2.3.2: work in progress. Bernhard |
From: Peter B. <alt...@go...> - 2002-04-25 08:08:04
|
Thank you for the info. > > Just another question: where/how can I download the source for v2.3.1, > > if there's no cvs (and network itself) on machine where I should build > > and use it. > Hmm. No cvs, no internet, but you want the most recent SDCC. That's not > easy! What kind of services can you use? http, ftp, ssh? There are http and ftp with Win95 here, in my workplace. But not at home, where Mandrake 8.2 reports "segmentation fault", when I try to compile an old project with snapshot. So, I said about the need of the tgz downloadable, recent source. And it seems I found it now at http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/files/tarballs/sdcc.tgz Please correct the upper 4 links at http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/sdcctarbin.html Peter |