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

[David Given <dg@cowlark.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1745 bytes --]

On 27/02/12 19:37, Harley Laue wrote:
[...]
> I was barely able to even get this one to compile on my host machine. It
> seems they don't have very good support for 64bit Linux. Once it was
> compiled the ack command (for instance) had no usage help message as far
> as I could tell. Overall, it didn't leave a very good taste in my mouth.

Yeah, I got fairly burnt out working on it --- it's a massive chunk of
code and simply coming to terms with the build system was incredibly
hard work. (I eventually had to *write my own build tool* to make it
build. Sigh.) The 64 bit issues basically stem from the fact that it
comes from another era and it doesn't understand longs that are 64 bits
wide. I have a fix that seems to work. I just don't understand *why* it
works, which is why it's not checked in.

...also, I've just discovered this piece of code:

vprint(fmt,p1,p2,p3,p4,p5,p6,p7) char *fmt ; {
        /* Diagnostic print, no auto NL */
        fprintf(STDOUT,fmt,p1,p2,p3,p4,p5,p6,p7);
}

*shudder* As I said, another era.

As for documentation --- there should be man pages for pretty much
everything, although I am aware that some of the more exotic stuff (like
the assemblers) haven't made it to the release package.

If anyone's interested, I can have another go at making it work on
64-bit machines. I think the output code is better than bcc's, but it's
been a while since I've seen the output. (The 8086 backend has had a
fair bit of work done to it.)

-- 
┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ───── http://www.cowlark.com ─────
│
│ "Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by
│ stupidity." --- Nick Diamos (Hanlon's Razor)


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 254 bytes --]