From gcc-return-59269-listarch-gcc=gcc dot gnu dot org at gcc dot gnu dot org Tue Aug 27 21:12:06 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org Received: (qmail 20783 invoked by alias); 27 Aug 2002 21:12:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner at gcc dot gnu dot org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org Received: (qmail 20765 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2002 21:12:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (205.180.83.106) by sources dot redhat dot com with SMTP; 27 Aug 2002 21:12:02 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2 dot redhat dot com (8 dot 11 dot 6/8 dot 11 dot 6) with ESMTP id g7RKuFs13834; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:56:15 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2 dot corp dot redhat dot com (8 dot 11 dot 6/8 dot 11 dot 6) with ESMTP id g7RLBtu24247; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 17:11:55 -0400 Received: from tonopah.toronto.redhat.com (tonopah.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.91]) by potter dot sfbay dot redhat dot com (8 dot 11 dot 6/8 dot 11 dot 6) with ESMTP id g7RLBse04834; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:11:54 -0700 Received: (from wilson@localhost) by tonopah dot toronto dot redhat dot com (8 dot 11 dot 6/8 dot 11 dot 6) id g7RLBrY19874; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 17:11:53 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: tonopah dot toronto dot redhat dot com: wilson set sender to wilson at redhat dot com using -f To: Dave Hudson Cc: Somasekhar_K , "'gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org'" Subject: Re: Does gcc works as a cross compiler to 8031 micro controllers ? References: <3D6BDE7E dot 20803 at cyclicode dot net> From: Jim Wilson Date: 27 Aug 2002 17:11:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: <3D6BDE7E dot 20803 at cyclicode dot net> Message-ID: Lines: 24 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Dave Hudson writes: > Hi Jim, > While 8031/8051 processors are problematic I think your statement > isn't strictly correct Yes, you are right. My statement was overly broad. I was just trying to give a simple answer to a simple question, and not get bogged down in all of the details. The poor guy got flamed for something beyond his control, so it was only decent of us to give him a real answer. I am not familiar with the AVR, 68hc11, and IP2022. The H8 family is a mixed 8/16 bit part. It has 8 16-bit registers, and thus isn't too bad as a gcc target. Looking at the 68hc11 port, I see that it has some 16-bit registers, so it doesn't look like an 8-bit microcontroller to me, it looks like a mixed 8/16 bit part. Maybe we need a definition of what exactly an 8-bit microcontroller is? While it is certainly possible to emit code for some 8-bit microcontrollers, I'd argue that it isn't worth the trouble. The quality of code you get is so bad that you would be better off writing in assembly language. Also, you have to take so many liberties with the C standard that you really aren't writing C code anymore. Jim