Hi, you may replace my libraries if you wish. Since the code is generated, I'd prefer one library. Several samples will need to be updated.
Matt. ________________________________ From: 'Oliver Seitz' via jallib <[email protected]> Sent: December 14, 2020 8:44 AM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [jallib] Large_array update Hi all! I would prefer not to change names, just replace the already existing libraries. I'm sure it is compatible. The code generated is in all cases smaller using the new lib, and executes faster in most cases. Only for 16bit on a PIC14 core I've seen the program running slower by about 2%, in all other cases it was faster by up to 33%. Speeding up the 16bit/PIC14 case would cost around 20 code words. Would still be over 200 code words smaller than the current lib, though. What I did not yet investigate: While usually needing the same or up to 7 bytes less, the new lib uses more RAM in two variants, 1 additional byte at 16bit/PIC14 and 4 additional bytes at 32bit/PIC16. That might be an issue, if an existing program is designed to use almost all RAM. The current address range of the PIC16 cores can only address 16kbyte. If there's a chip with more than 14kbyte GPR, the compiler has to be extended. If that happens, rebuilding the libs with the then-maximum amount of GPR would be the least problem. So it wouldn't be difficult to maintain compatibility within each package: As long as the compiler doesn't support more than 14k, the library doesn't need to. And if one is changed, the other is done easily. What gets onto my mind thinking about names: The current lib is designed to make use of up to four large arrays. The library is split up into 28 source files. When I'm already rewriting the lib, shouldn't I combine it into one, or at most four, source files? The script produces working libraries, but the comments arten't as nice as I wanted them ;-) Greets, Kiste Am Montag, 14. Dezember 2020, 10:07:35 MEZ hat Rob CJ <[email protected]> Folgendes geschrieben: Hi Kiste (and others), Can you send your latest version of your script? I propose to add a library called large_array_13k.jal or should we give it another name like super_array.jal? I think the size must be in the filename in case MicroChip releases a chip with 32k. @Others: Suggestions for a library name are welcome. Python seems to be the most popular language to use. I could give it a try to translate your script but currently I am investigating a compiler issue that takes up my time. Thanks. Kind regards, Rob ________________________________ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jallib/1684278583.441369.1607953459506%40mail.yahoo.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jallib/1684278583.441369.1607953459506%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jallib/SN6PR02MB49768E1B4F7B82A1F1992173DEC70%40SN6PR02MB4976.namprd02.prod.outlook.com.
