Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)


 

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
Jan Waclawek
06/21/09 15:03
Modified:
  06/21/09 15:05
Read: 335 times
Bratislava
Slovakia


 		 #166319 - that's it
Responding to: Frieder Ferlemann's previous message
Frieder Ferlemann said:
there is a lot to say about your code

... and most if it is already said in Chapter 6 and 3.9.1 of the SDCC's fine manual.

Just a note: a somewhat-better-than-SDCC C compiler would optimise out the loop entirely, in spite of your attempt to fool it by the "opti_fooler". I wonder how could this work in Keil or Raisonance.

JW


List of 17 messages in thread
TopicAuthorDate
UART code porting to SDCC      Girish Nikam      06/21/09 13:29      
   doesn't SDCC warn about line 36?      Frieder Ferlemann      06/21/09 13:59      
      that's it      Jan Waclawek      06/21/09 15:03      
         ah ha      Jez Smith      06/21/09 15:08      
            Don't blame the optimiser!      Andy Neil      06/22/09 01:36      
      doesn't SDCC warn about line 36      Girish Nikam      06/21/09 22:13      
         hmmm      Jez Smith      06/22/09 00:42      
         modified dog      Andy Peters      06/23/09 14:21      
   I cannot remember now      Jez Smith      06/21/09 14:33      
   xmt_flag., why "int"?      Mahesh Joshi      06/22/09 01:53      
      if you want to use it as "int" / "char"      Andy Neil      06/22/09 02:47      
   You destroy succeding putchar()'s      David Prentice      06/22/09 05:14      
      "Volatile" Helps      Girish Nikam      06/22/09 07:42      
         "bit" is more useful      Mahesh Joshi      06/22/09 08:16      
            buzzzzz      Erik Malund      06/22/09 08:37      
               family      Jan Waclawek      06/22/09 13:44      
            stdbool      Oliver Sedlacek      06/23/09 06:44      

Back to Subject List