Re: Startup code

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:13:13 +0200, Meindert Sprang wrote:

> I'd like to disagree with this. In all compilers I used so far, the startup
> code only set's up the very basic things like the stack pointer, code and
> data segments dependig on the CPU used and initializing all variables and
> constants. The rest, like further processor and peripheral initialisation is
> done in user written C functions. And so far, I have never written start up
> code, I could always use the start up code supplied by the compiler vendor,
> which is automatically chosed and configured by most IDE's.
> My experience anyway,
>
> Meindert

My experience also.


Bob

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: IMPLICIT NONE (F2k8+/-)
    ... The fact that I agree with you in this debate doesn't give me any greater sway with those who disagree. ... In relative terms, as a proportion of all computing, it is shrinking. ... Current C-99 compilers that I use issue a *warning* when 'int' is omitted, ... until the end of time without regard to the standard. ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: Benefit of not defining the order of execution
    ... loose-loose option to me. ... I disagree; ... evaluation order choices by compilers. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Whats in the Fortran libraries?
    ... Fortran 95 compilers are not. ... only f77 and are still supported, I'd disagree with you on that. ... versions of operating systems has an inherent reliability issue. ... operating system updates do break compilers. ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)