Re: 8051 development board in India

From: Chris Hills (chris_at_phaedsys.org)
Date: 01/25/04 

Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 09:37:15 +0000

In article <Y3AQb.22747$q4.19182@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Lewin A.R.W. Edwards <larwe@larwe.com> writes
>>>BTW, when I said sdcc, I had a couple of wires crossed, I thought Ulf
>>>was talking about 8051 code development.
>>
>>
>> if he was then the sdcc will not be much use to him.
>
>Oh? Why would that be? "SDCC is a Freeware,

Irrelevant. (besides most serious engineers can't afford free tools.)

>retargettable,
(inefficient)

>optimizing

optimising? Not compared to any of the commercial compilers. In fact it
has a very LOW code density and virtually the worst data density..

>ANSI - C compiler.

And you can justify that statement? Remind me, which test suites has it
passed? I doubt very much if it is remotely complies to the C standard.

Besides if it is fully ISO-C compatible if will need a lot of extensios
for the 51.

>The current version targets the Intel 8051,
Very few use that these days There are over 550 51 types out there using
many different cores

>Maxim
>80DS390

Knowing how difficult it was for the commercial compiler vendors to
support it with the support of Dallas I am very surprised that it can.
This memory models.

I know it is that far different that KEil for example use a different
linker for it to their standard linker.

>and the Zilog Z80 based MCUs."

that explains why it is so inefficient.

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/\
/\/\/ chris@phaedsys.org www.phaedsys.org \/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/