Weddington, Eric schrieb:
currently working on a set of changes to avr-libc that should get
it to build without the -k switch to make. - Please don't use
gcc 4.5.1 for any real-world work. I've heard that there are bug
reports against AVR GCC 4.5.x that need to get fixed. However, if
you're using 4.5.1 to do some testing on the AVR port then that
would be very helpful.
Never actually used avr-gcc 4.x on my projects. Just doing some
benchmarks with 4.x then and when and therefore still stuck at
3.4.6.
Understood. AVR GCC 4.4.3 seems stable so far. But, depending on your
benchmarks you may, or may not, want to stick with 3.4.6, also
depending on your criteria.
Looking at the numbers I first thought 4.5 code is too poor to be used.
But skimming its output it might be the first 4.x that has the potential
to catch up with 3.4.6. There are minor issues that blow code size like
the X-reg reloads and some unlucky inline heuristics, but these are
local in some sense and the "quality gap" is not scattered all over the
code. However, I don't know anything about its stability.
Was just being curious and tried to build latest avr tools and to
catch up with current state of avr-gcc. Seems to me as if
development of avr-gcc is dead somehow? So the development had not
been stopped because avr-gcc is mature, though :o)
>
I wouldn't say that development of avr-gcc is dead. It is the usual
culprit: never enough people to test and fix. Hopefully that should
be fixed soon-ish, but I'm always hesitant to promise anything.
Ya, who has the power and endurance to bring avr-gcc forward if not
Atmel...?
Would be a pity if avr-gcc was discontinued because the backend is
defunct because no one (or hardly anyone) cares...
Are there plans for new features? I'm thinking of taking advantage of
named address spaces or implementing for unexploited optimization
opportunies.
Georg
_______________________________________________
AVR-GCC-list mailing list
AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
