This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC Port (gcc backend) for Microchip PICMicro microcontroller
- From: François Poulain <fpoulain at enib dot fr>
- To: Colm O' Flaherty <colm_o_flaherty at hotmail dot com>, Damien Thebault <damien dot thebault at laposte dot net>
- Cc: gcc at gnu dot org, tbird-contact at cox dot net, gabriele at caracausi dot it, dj at redhat dot com, mrs at apple dot com, Kevin dot Tucker at Microchip dot com, Lmjennings at ra dot rockwell dot com, raimund at vmars dot tuwien dot ac dot at, mjv at x64 dot com, trebor at trebor dot org, vrokas at otenet dot gr, alex at monaghan dot co dot uk, dooms at student dot info dot ucl dot ac dot be, denisc at overta dot ru, aph at redhat dot com, matz at suse dot de, dave at cyclicode dot net, eric dot robert at videotron dot ca, Svein dot Seldal at solidas dot com
- Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 16:12:43 +0100
- Subject: Re: GCC Port (gcc backend) for Microchip PICMicro microcontroller
- References: <BAY112-F23513D641D0C9FC86FB577B4E90@phx.gbl>
Le lundi 06 mars 2006 Ã 13:39 +0000, Colm O' Flaherty a Ãcrit :
> I'm really interested in getting a gcc port (gcc backend) for the Microchip
> PIC16F family (14 bit instruction, 8 bit word) up and running. I've seen
> various mails to the gcc list that refer to this, the most recent being from
It a good question. I think 18F is clearly C-oriented architecture,
whereas coding C on 16F is not very efficient. In the other hand, 16F is
quite simple,it could be a good example, and I better know 16F assembly
than 18F assembly (I always coded 18F in C).
> Can you summarise the current status of your port, or any other active gcc
> PIC ports that you are aware of?
For the moment, I am only studying internal gcc documentation. I will be
quite busy until june month, so I don't planned anything for the moment.
About this subject, if a french people know well gcc machine descriptor
language, I am interessed in being mailled by him, to learn more about
> There is an existing open-source C compiler with PIC support (SDCC) that
> I've used, but my experience with this is that it isn't as scalable as I
> would like (particularly for device support), whereas gcc is a well known
> compiler with a solid code base, great platform support, and comes with
> pretty much every Linux distribution I've ever seen.
I think so.
> Am I mistaken in thinking that if we got a gcc PIC backend up and running,
> that we would be able to code for PICs in C, C++, Fortran, Ada, and Java
> (subject to memory limitations, etc)??? Thats a dream...
I think so, and it's also the dream of a friend. Really, gcc seems have
a different behaviour for C-C++ and the others. I can't tell more about
that subject, and as far I am concerned, I don't have the competences
and the will to use Java on Pic.
> Colm O' Flaherty