[Coco] gcc-coco revisited

Gene Heskett 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
> too.
>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.

Cheers, Gene
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 mailing list