[Coco] gcc-coco revisited
gene.heskett at verizon.net
Fri Oct 31 18:50:00 EST 2003
On Friday 31 October 2003 11:00, KnudsenMJ at aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 10/31/03 9:24:19 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>billcousert at yahoo.com writes:
>> Reasons for using RMA:
>> 1. It's Coco - strictly nostalgic.
>> 2. It's Coco - The rof's generated by gcc09 could be used on a
>> real Coco or an emulator.
>> 3. We already have rlink libraries
>And (4) a lost of Coconuts are used to its syntax and pseudo-ops.
> Learning the pseudo-ops and memory allocation conventions of
> different assemblers (to say nothing of macro processing) can be a
> big learning curve.
>Also, why such a hurry to abandon the original Microware C compiler?
> Its bugs and shortcomings are well enough understood to work
> around. CPrep2 makes up for a lot.
When did that replace my cprep19?
>Originally, C++ compilers were just pre-processors that "macro
> expanded" C++ source into straight C code. Granted, they require
> some things that Microware's old K&R C can't handle, like long
> names. But I wonder if an extra pre-proc stage couldn't fix that
>If there *is* a back end to GCC++ that can not only output 6809
> code, but can be optioned to do it PIC or not (for L2 or RSDOS, see
> my other posting), then maybe GCC is worth pursuing. Don't know
> how, if ever, 6309 extensions could be provided, either by
> Microware C or GCC. --Mike K.
AMD K6-III at 500mhz 320M
Athlon1600XP at 1400mhz 512M
99.27% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attornies please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2003 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
More information about the Coco