> That might be a good idea when you are very very pressed for speed or
> (code) size and have enough time to do the hand-optimizing, but IMO in
> most cases the (programmer's time) benefits of modularity (I need a
> buffered UART output? let's just include the appropriate file!) are more
> important.

That's true, however I think the kind of things like this the benefit of the
usage of the linker script is highly valuable.

Tamas


On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> wrote:

> >> Why not? I would promote putting a RES near the code that needs it, not
> >> in some central place.
> >
> > Because in my opinion it leads to laziness, it's like the C++ style "here
> we
> > need a variable so lets just create it". And then hard to organise in
> which
> > section it should be in, what will be the best to avoid to much bankings
> or
> > to use overlays to be able to use less ram.
>
> That might be a good idea when you are very very pressed for speed or
> (code) size and have enough time to do the hand-optimizing, but IMO in
> most cases the (programmer's time) benefits of modularity (I need a
> buffered UART output? let's just include the appropriate file!) are more
> important.
>
> --
>
> Wouter van Ooijen
>
> -- -------------------------------------------
> Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
> consultancy, development, PICmicro products
> docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: www.voti.nl/hvu
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>



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