 | | Re: GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
(...) Hi Dick Swan, That is a nice flexible way of doing it. I will see if I can figure it out in gcc. Thanks for the idea. (...) Well...I have -=Os on, which are all size reducing features. The actual "problem" can also be this packed stuff that we (...) (18 years ago, 15-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: NeXT-A-Sketch - My second program/first Dave-built NXT 'bot(ish...)
|
|
(...) Or do what I did. Change the program so you only have to tap the button to clear the screen so you can easily reset it while shaking upside down. (18 years ago, 15-Mar-07, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
|
| |
| | Re: GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
(...) LEGO is using a slightly older version of IAR Embedded Workbench. Maybe that explains it. Or maybe its a 1.03 vs 1.04 source code difference. (...) I have been told that the following is the standard operating procedure for generating the (...) (18 years ago, 15-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
Regarrding overwriting the flash system. I encountered the problem of flash file system overwriting user code as well. It's because it is hard coded in the code the starting address of the file system. There's a constant named "STARTOFUSERFLASH" (...) (18 years ago, 14-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
... (...) I have not done that. Well, just a little bit:-). The best one (not surprisingly) is the "-Os" optimization, which does this "Optimize for size. -Os enables all -O2 optimizations that do not typically increase code size." (...) I tried (...) (18 years ago, 14-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
