Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #31199
| From | Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.arch.embedded |
| Subject | Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? |
| Date | 2022-09-06 04:26 -0700 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <tf7aol$3t5ak$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <tf54sg$tamn$1@solani.org> <tf5bsg$3ktct$1@dont-email.me> <tf6sfs$t06u$1@solani.org> <tf725q$3sadk$1@dont-email.me> <tf76ek$uf28$1@solani.org> |
On 9/6/2022 3:12 AM, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: > Am 06.09.22 um 10:59 schrieb Don Y: >> >> It could also be that many of the 8b devices are just not seeing much >> market share (or have fallen out of production). How many 68xx devices >> win designs nowadays? Does Zilog even make processors anymore? Etc. > > However, there are still plenty of people compiling code for the Z80 and SM83. > But practically no one uses non-free compilers to do that. I think much of that has to do with *when* those devices came on the market. The choices for toolchains in the 68xx(x) and 808x/Z8x eras was barely more than manufacturer supplied tools (e.g., under ISIS on the Intellec, RIO on the ZDS, Versados on the EXORmacs, etc.). Recall PCs only came into being in the early 80's; CP/M boxen being more common for nonproprietary platforms. I didn't use PC-hosted tools until the NS32K -- and even those weren't actually hosted on an x86! > Most use SDCC either > directly or via the z88dk fork. A few use zcc or ack. All of these are free, so > not covered by the question that started the thread. I'm sure every device I designed is still using the toolchain that I selected at the time -- hence my comment of "inertia" in my initial post in this thread. There are a fair number of products that have very long lifetimes where the cost of making a significant change (i.e., complete redesign) drags in so many externalities that it becomes prohibitive. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" (I have some devices that are still being supported 30+ years after the initial design) ISTR the US military still uses 6502's in some of their armaments. And I know there was a radhard 8085 some time ago... > It is mostly a retrocomputing / -gaming crowd. Since many of them are willing > to try development snapshots, and report bugs, their use of SDCC helps a lot in > spotting bugs in SDCC early, so they can be fixed before a release. Most of the arcade pieces that I'm familiar with were developed in ASM (though I have no idea what the design methodology was for consoles). Often, the "OS" (more of an "executive") was tailored to a very low overhead implementation that doesn't lend itself to use of HLLs (e.g., a single stack so any multitasking has to ensure stack protocol isn't violated across a task switch) [There was also a lot of proprietary hardware to manipulate the video out-of-band as the processors of that era couldn't update displays as fast as they were refreshed!]
Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-07-20 13:49 +0200
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? "Peter Heitzer" <peter.heitzer@rz.uni-regensburg.de> - 2022-07-20 14:23 +0000
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-07-20 18:33 +0200
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2022-07-20 15:55 -0400
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-07-21 12:58 +0200
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2022-07-21 15:05 +0000
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2022-07-21 13:18 -0400
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Clifford Heath <no_spam@please.net> - 2022-07-22 13:00 +1000
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2022-07-22 09:27 -0400
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? boB <boB@K7IQ.com> - 2022-08-25 19:14 -0700
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? chris <chris-nospam@tridac.net> - 2022-08-26 17:17 +0100
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-08-26 18:45 +0200
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2022-07-21 11:10 -0700
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2022-07-21 21:56 +0300
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-07-21 20:56 +0200
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? chris <chris-nospam@tridac.net> - 2022-07-22 12:04 +0100
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2022-09-01 23:25 -0700
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Michael Schwingen <news-1513678000@discworld.dascon.de> - 2022-09-04 20:39 +0000
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-09-05 17:33 +0200
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2022-09-05 10:32 -0700
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-09-06 09:22 +0200
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2022-09-06 01:59 -0700
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-09-06 12:12 +0200
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2022-09-06 04:26 -0700
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-09-06 11:09 +0200
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-09-06 12:41 +0200
Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-09-06 15:00 +0200
csiph-web