Hi Vaclav,
I think a minor rewrite of the microchip code is probably easiest, but the code is quite spread out, and, i also don't think it uses anything like threading, so couldn't cope with more than one request. I only really need to know the syntax to recreate the packed structures. Unless the structures are packed by default in SDCC.

2009/1/28 Vaclav Peroutka <vaclavpe@seznam.cz>
Hi Peter,

 > I agree with you in part on this, but it is useful to have a clear answer
> about the state of the compiler you're working with so you know what you can
> expect. Its open source so it doesnt need to be sold, and i'm happier to
> help improve it if I know what its like, rather than assuming its in a
> stable state and getting disheartened.

No compiler is completely without bugs. Recently we found in IAR for TI MSP strange bug related to "while() {if ( ~something){}}" construct. I don't remember exactly details. Compiler generated really wrong code. Without bit inversion it was OK. On the other side I used SDCC PIC18 port in several simpler projects and it worked without problem. Results are highly dependent on programmer style. If you ever programmed in assembler and sometimes use such techniques in C, it is always better than style used by programmers in Java or C#.

> On a slightly different note, i'm considering rewriting the tcp/ip stack
> myself, as i could also (maybe) put in ipv6 support at the same time. Is
> this as silly an idea as I think it is? or is it quite straightforward once
> i've got some code to handle the ethernet interface?

It is definitely good idea. I have the board with ENC28J60 (not yet finished - lack of free time) and have plan to do something similar. Anyway I don't know what will be simpler - either porting existing code ( from Microchip, uIP ...) or to start from scratch. But your effort can be motivating for me :-)


This SF.net email is sponsored by:
SourcForge Community
SourceForge wants to tell your story.
Sdcc-user mailing list