"Somehow, I have the impression that JAL have better "dead code removal" algorithms. "
Than mikroPascal - wanted to say. On May 22, 6:04 pm, "funlw65(Vasi)" <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, his closed source libraries. But you can write your own pack of > libraries and the mikroPascal community already did this. > In mikroPascal language you have support for assembler code. > > In my opinion, PMP is much better than mikroPascal, the only drawback > of PMP being the absence of "dead code removal" feature (the zone > where JAL shines, and the reason why is better to have specific > libraries instead of universal ones for PMP). Although, PMP is almost > as much as JAL in produced code size; but compensate with language > features. Somehow, I have the impression that JAL have better "dead > code removal" algorithms. > > Anyway, I'm talking about learning only one (very easy) language and > being able to use a large model of microcontrollers: Microchip (Pic12, > Pic16, Pic18, Pic24/33, Pic32), AVR(ATtiny, ATmega, Xmega, etc.), > 8051. Regarding this, mikroPascal is superior to PMP and JAL. For a > beginner is a matter of choosing the right microcontroller for his > application (no delays). > > In my opinion, JAL is brilliant on smaller chips, where you don't need > sophisticated language features. It will start to loose this advantage > (against PMP) when it will come with support for pointers and floating > point math. > > Vasi > > On May 22, 9:56 am, vasile surducan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 3:35 AM, Jaluino <[email protected]> wrote: > > > funlw65(Vasi) wrote: > > > > "bigger bugs (A bug's life movie)", the best choice is mikroPascal > > >> from MikroElektronika. > > > > mikroPascal is nice - I'm still using the free (restricted code size) demo > > > but may well buy it. > > > Can you point in a few words which are the mikroPascal weak features > > compared with jal ? I have the feeling I've understand those even I've only > > take a brief look to the mikroPascal compiler. > > > The best quality of jal, which I have appreciated since 2000, is the choice > > of having total control on your libraries and of your written code down to > > the assembler level. This is extremely important for a guy which writes > > intimate code for the machine, rather than HLL heavily structured code. > > > thank you, > > Vasile -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.
