: avr-gcc-list-bounces+eweddington=cso.atmel@nongnu.org
[mailto:avr-gcc-list-bounces+eweddington=cso.atmel@nongnu.
org] On Behalf Of David Carr
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 2:34 PM
To: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org
Subject: [avr-gcc-list] Most reliable version of avr-gcc?
If one were
On 17 Dec 2008 at 15:34, David Carr wrote:
If one were to compile a program for the AVR where reliability was far
more important than code size or performance optimizations, what version
of avr-gcc would you choose?
You should use more than one version. You would also need test cases so
You must also consider if your target MCU is supported by a particular
version of GCC. If you have a target supported only in the last
versions, your choice between GCC versions will narrow.
Bernard
David Carr wrote:
By reliability, I mean least probability of undetected errors in
machine
Hi,
We all know, that in general not always the most recent version is the
most reliable version. As of a Linux distrib, other software,
automobile, wine :-) , etc. We can recently read/hear/experience about
these, independently from the special test cases. I think it's the base
of David 's
If one were to compile a program for the AVR where reliability was far
more important than code size or performance optimizations, what version
of avr-gcc would you choose?
Thanks for your insight,
-DC
___
AVR-GCC-list mailing list
-Original Message-
From:
avr-gcc-list-bounces+eweddington=cso.atmel@nongnu.org
[mailto:avr-gcc-list-bounces+eweddington=cso.atmel@nongnu.
org] On Behalf Of David Carr
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 2:34 PM
To: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org
Subject: [avr-gcc-list] Most
