Michael Rigby-Jones wrote:

>> Unlike a "normal" processor where a compiler choice is likely to lead to
>> a slightly larger/slower result, on the PIC, it is pretty easy to lead
>> to a MUCH larger/slower result. 
> 
> I guess you haven't used the HiTech compiler much?  It almost always
> does a great job of optimisation, the generated code is often as good or
> better than hand written assembly.  

Also my experience. 

>> Again, understand that I am referring here to modern, nested scope
>> languages. 
> HLL's also offer one big optimisation advantage over assembler, they can
> produce highly optimised code  that would be unmaintainable or at least
> very difficult to understand in assembler e.g. overlyaing memory
> locations for numerous different tasks throughout the code. 

Yes, I also didn't understand John's comment about the nested scopes. It's
exactly the scope thing that makes the overlaying of local variable
possible, and at least the Hi-Tech C compilers do a pretty good job of
that. 

I of course agree that one should program in C differently on a PIC than
one would on a PC. But I guess that's obvious... :)

Gerhard
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist