William \"Chops\" Westfield wrote:

> On Nov 5, 2008, at 7:32 AM, Walter Banks wrote:
>
> I read this as "While there have been C compilers for some time now
> that support the midrange PICS, there are certain constructs that are
> common in some application areas (eg ISO61131) that were NOT easily
> implemented by those C compilers that are much more easily implemented
> using the enhanced midrange architecture."
>
> (I'm not sure how how function pointers were handled before, but it
> sure looks like it's a lot easier to do now!  For that matter, while
> it may not be a big deal to ASM programmers, the whole "registers,
> SFRs, RAM, and Flash now share a single address space" is probably
> REALLY nice for C compiler writers...)
>
> (It's a nice sign that the compiler vendors were involved with this so
> early on in the games...)

> I'm not sure how how function pointers were handled before,
> but it sure looks like it's a lot easier to do now!

Our code generator is using both the new pointers and earlier
code for pointers in the generated code.  There are trade-offs, but
now we have a code generation choices that increases the
opportunities to map application to the silicon cleanly.  For what
it is worth our code generator was implemented as a separate
unique core. There are core level choices that make this a good
design decision.

Regards

--
Walter Banks
Byte Craft Limited
http://www.bytecraft.com



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