I like my code to be portable between CodeVision and avr-gcc.
a most horable 'like' HOWEVER, that makes no sense for I/O code which is what this thread is SOLELY about.

Similarly I strive for portability between Keil and sdcc for 8051 family. I fully accept the restrictions that this entails. I would guess that Eric would choose ONE compiler.
Why not choose a compiler and stick with it. At one time I had to do new code with Keil and 'old code' with IAR (I think - or was it Hitech? I've used so many). I would say that I heve never had so many compiler errors, constantly using IAR lingo for Keil and Keil lingo for IAR.

I would agree with you that the generated code would not have conditionals. YIPEE

I had a brief look at the online Philips Code Architect. Personally I would prefer hand coding. It would be interesting to hear from users of these Code generation tools.
I have used CodeArchitect (never the online slowpoke version) and used the result as a base for my HW IIC code. Believe me, when I say "as a base", I mean it, you would not recognize the code. However starting off with working code for something as flexible/cumbersome as the hardware IIC having a working base is a godsend, you get ALL the conditions and which conditions can be treated the same way, what to do in the conditions ..... .
That I, being me, did all the work with a '668 datasheet in hand is a given.

Erik

Basically the thing is that CodeArchitect (and its cousins) need to be able to select things on an individual basis, real code does it in one whack. A samll example:<pre>CodeArchitect:
STA = 0;
STO = 0;
reworked code (for SILabs F12x/f13x:
//ISR7con = 0 + SM_SMB0CN_ENB + SM_SMB0CN_STA + SM_SMB0CN_STO + SM_SMB0CN_AA;
ISR7con = 0 + SM_SMB0CN_ENB + SM_SMB0CN_AA; // NAK him