Re: SDCC porting feasibility study, part 1: the assembler

> Maybe a bit off-topic, but:
>
> Hmm, I had a bad experience with SDCC with Z80 as target. Maybe I was
> not so smart, but I couldn't make it emit RODATA like stuff, it just generated
> Z80 code (!) to store data, instead of just the data.
>
> I just mention it, because it can be interesting problem for other targets too.
>
> Since the problem is quite "funny", I assume it was only my mistake that I
> left some option which would told SDCC not to do that, though ... etc.

Hmm, maybe I should have started by looking at ELKS code and seeing
what kinds of features it needs and seeing if SDCC can deliver in
general.

Anyone else know any practical compatibility issues or other thoughts
on this?  I tried googling the old standby "sdcc sucks" and only found
one guy that didn't know how to use the volatile keyword.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-8086" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html