On Fri, 8 Jan 1999, wouter van ooijen / floortje hanneman wrote:

> I have put the new version of the JAL compiler at
>    www.xs4all.nl/~wf/wouter/pic/jal
>
> Compared to the previous version:
> - Better and more libraries.
> - Better code generation.
> - Some simple optimizations.
> - The compiler is faster and uses less stack and heap.
> - The assembler output is acceptable to mpasm2.
> - The assembler output contains the command line, compilation statistics
> and shows the variable allocation.
> - Reasonable documentation (in html).
>
> I have some jal-related questions to the PIC-list community:
>
> 1.
> How important (for PIC programming)
> is language/compiler support for 2,3,4 byte or even larger integers?
I'd say 2 byte integers are important. However, there are also a lot of
apps where 4 byte integers are also useful.
> What is more important, signed integers or unsigned?
Hard to say. I guess (from practice) unsigned are slightly more important.
> What would be a better implementation strategy (for 2,3,4 etc byte
> integers):
> inline code (fast, but can get bulky) or library calls (slower, but
> can be much smaller).
Due to the limited amount of the precious ROM, I'd prefer call's.

>
> 2.
> Can someone come up with a nice informal benchmark compiled
> with a good C compiler which I can use as "level to be reached"
> for my compiler (especially in terms of code compactness).
> For example: a clock / temperature display, with an lm75
> for temperature and a hd44780 for the LCD?
I can not promise but maybe I'll check it.
>
> regards,
> Wouter.
>
>