On 09/13/2013 12:27 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
On 09/13/2013 11:37 AM, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
If we've got to that point then I may be able to assist in making that
happen, but there were some concerns that those using the old packages
may not be ready to move to the new ones right away - so
msp430mcu in its current form will almost certainly not work with the new
compiler, unless somebody's forked it without telling me. The headers get
mspgcc-specific material added, and the linker scripts are for the mspgcc
version of gdb.
It would make sense to have msp430mcu be the mechanism
What's the current word on the msp430 variant header files and
corresponding linker scripts? Is there a plan to release those soon? If
not, has anyone testing been done of the compiler against Peter's linker
scripts and header files?
Thomas Taranowski | 425-442-9209 | skype: thomas.taranowski |
On 14/09/13 01:25, DJ Delorie wrote:
For small targets like this, it is common to compile C++ with -fno-rtti
True, but even the static objects must be initialized code adds some
runtime space/time cost. It's not much, but the smallest MSP430's
don't have much rom/ram to spare.
Correct me
On 14/09/13 02:45, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
On 09/13/2013 12:12 AM, David Brown wrote:
Do you know of any timeplans for when it will be possible to get
official toolchain snapshot packages with gcc, binutils and a library
as prebuilt packages and source bundles? As a developer, I can play
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but this only applies when the
initialisation involves a constructor function rather than just
assignment of a fixed value.
Correct.
are all run before main() is called. These might add extra code space
because the constructor calls can't be fully inlined
On 12/09/13 20:48, DJ Delorie wrote:
Just FYI, the port is now official as it's been approved and checked
in to the FSF repository!
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-09/msg00107.html
I have some follow-up patches that will get commited shortly too,
though.
Great news!
Do you know of any
On 12/09/13 21:27, DJ Delorie wrote:
Is c++ an officially supported aspect of the port?
I'm going to conditionally say yes because, while I build and test
C++, I know there are some language features of C I took advantage of
to get far (20-bit) addressing, that C++ simply doesn't support. So
On Friday 13 Sep 2013 09:01:27 David Brown wrote:
On 12/09/13 21:27, DJ Delorie wrote:
Is c++ an officially supported aspect of the port?
I'm going to conditionally say yes because, while I build and test
C++, I know there are some language features of C I took advantage of
to get far
Hi,
On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 12:27 -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
On 09/13/2013 11:37 AM, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
If we've got to that point then I may be able to assist in making that
happen, but there were some concerns that those using the old packages
may not be ready to move to the new
On 09/13/2013 11:37 AM, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
If we've got to that point then I may be able to assist in making that
happen, but there were some concerns that those using the old packages
may not be ready to move to the new ones right away - so it would be
nice to hear some thoughts on
For small targets like this, it is common to compile C++ with -fno-rtti
True, but even the static objects must be initialized code adds some
runtime space/time cost. It's not much, but the smallest MSP430's
don't have much rom/ram to spare.
This may be a little off this particular topic, but I was wondering if,
along with the new toolchain support, there might be some work done to
improve the experience of the MSP430 Launchpad in linux?
The CDC-ACM driver has some unpleasant issues with the Launchpad (see, eg:
On 09/13/2013 12:12 AM, David Brown wrote:
Do you know of any timeplans for when it will be possible to get
official toolchain snapshot packages with gcc, binutils and a library
as prebuilt packages and source bundles? As a developer, I can play
around with a self-built gcc, but for
Okay I'll ask... Is there FORTRAN support?
Now on to my real question...
how much real world testing has been done? Has the output been put onto
real msp430 chips?
Or are you testing against the test suites?
just wondering how much it has been banged on.
Is it Alpha/Beta status?
I
Is c++ an officially supported aspect of the port?
I'm going to conditionally say yes because, while I build and test
C++, I know there are some language features of C I took advantage of
to get far (20-bit) addressing, that C++ simply doesn't support. So
I'm not sure how well C++ will work in
Just FYI, the port is now official as it's been approved and checked
in to the FSF repository!
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-09/msg00107.html
I have some follow-up patches that will get commited shortly too,
though.
Okay I'll ask... Is there FORTRAN support?
No! :-)
(but it might work anyway, I haven't tested)
Now on to my real question...
how much real world testing has been done? Has the output been put
onto real msp430 chips?
I'm testing against our simulator (it's in the gdb repo). I've
This is great news! Is c++ an officially supported aspect of the port?
Thomas Taranowski | 425-442-9209 | skype: thomas.taranowski |
baringforge.com
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 11:48 AM, DJ Delorie d...@redhat.com wrote:
Just FYI, the port is now official as it's been approved and checked
in
TI will provide header and linker files for all MSP430 derivatives my m/o
August.
Thanks,
Thomas Mitnacht
-Original Message-
From: Adam Ford [mailto:aford...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 9:54 AM
To: mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [Mspgcc-users] Unofficial Red Hat
20 matches
Mail list logo
