[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] AVR-GCC question

From: Daniel O'Connor
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] AVR-GCC question
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 19:01:23 +0930
User-agent: KMail/1.8

On Sun, 22 May 2005 18:01, address@hidden wrote:
> > Perhaps it may be a good idea to have a separate set
> > of standards for embedded 'C'.
> I have programs which run on many quite different systems, including
> embedded SoC systems as well as huge UNIX clusters. While I am happy
> to get access to all the special resources (at least for the few
> time-critical parts), I am even more happy to have common base which is
> likely to work everywhere.
> I think that trying hard to push things into C compliance is very well
> worth it, the result being compliant implementation where possible and
> clear documentation of even slight divergencies for the rest.

I think the fundamental problem is that C wasn't designed for split 
architectures like the AVR so you are forced into using hacks to get it to 

ie on say, a HC12, none of this is an issue because it behaves much more like 
a "normal" system.

Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au
"The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from."
  -- Andrew Tanenbaum
GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C

Attachment: pgpOouv3KpBNh.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]