| ??? 05/04/06 06:24 Read: times |
#115526 - too bad Responding to: ???'s previous message |
That's too bad! But why did Atmel once declare a header include to be compatible with both SDCC and Keil C?
Binary compatibility is not the thing I was looking for. I'm mainly interested in source code compatibilities for the input files. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| SDCC and Keil C compatibility | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| major differences | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ansi incompatabilities | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| SDCC vs keil | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| other way round :) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| SDCC vs Keil Part 2 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| actualy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| thanks | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sfr declarations NOT compatible | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| too bad | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Perhaps it is? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| indeed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| it almost is | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the root of many evils | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Another important difference! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| fast & efficient code | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Problem with porting code | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| bla bla | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| semicolon missing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| set TI=1 in your init_uart() | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Have you looked at this? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
General Tip: Disable all extensions | 01/01/70 00:00 |