This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: GCC Port (gcc backend) for Microchip PICMicro microcontroller

On Mar 13, 2006, at 5:29 AM, Colm O' Flaherty wrote:
I've been thinking a bit more about this (no code yet: I was busy trying to find and fix a bug in gpsim), and I'm still not sure what the optimal development mode is.. by this, I mean.. "what should the proposed PIC port of GCC produce"?

If 100% of the ports produce assemble files, then, you'll want to produce assembly files. 100% of the ports produce assembly.

There are pros and cons to both approaches. Producing a hex file is (a lot?) more work, and would duplicate the work of gputils, but would leave gcc as a standalone tool, which I presume is desirable!


The issue here is that that gcc would then become "bound" to gputils,

Not a problem, though, we'd prefer that you did up a binutils port as well. The reason is that those utilities have a certain feature set that other tools don't have, and that feature set is used and it useful to the compiler and users.

Also, it is possible to do up a port first to gputils and then later to enhance it to target binutils, while retaining the ability to still target gputils, if people find that interesting.

The real issue here, for me, is the level of duplication / overlap with the SDCC project.

Don't worry, they can come join us and stop duplicating our work after you get a port going.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]