Am 09.12.25 um 12:05 schrieb Alan Cox:
> Sorry, the 6801 is okay. But far from "extremely nice […] for C" or
> "better than pretty much anything". IMO, the STM8 is far better, and
> some of the Z80-derivatives with efficient stackpointer-relative
> addressing are also quite good, the HCS08 isn't that bad either (though
> its sp-relative adressing mode is less efficeint than zero-page
> addressing, which makes it worse than STM8 or those Z80-derivatives
> mentioned before).
I am looking at code density and performance numbers. It certainly beats
the Z80 derived stuff I've looked at (Rabbit, Z280) for most cases. STM8
I'm not really familiar with at it's a modern microcontroller not a
"real" CPU 8)
We have graphs at
https://sourceforge.net/p/sdcc/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/sdcc-extra/historygraphs/,
which are meant to track SDCC progress/regress, but can be used to
compare aechitectures. For current SDCC, I do see a real Rabbit
advantage vs. Z80. In Coremark, the code sizes Z80:R3KA:STM8 roughly are
18:13:12, in Dhrystone 9:8:7, in Whetstone 13:10:9, in stdcbench 28:23:19.
I'm looking forward to see how this will compare to MC6801 and R4K, once
we support those.
Philipp
_______________________________________________
Sdcc-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sdcc-user
