| ??? 12/15/04 09:45 Read: times |
#83124 - 8051 vs C - answer is wrong Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Hi, Andy.
In general, my previous message was not only answer; it was a question too, Andy. Did you red, that I tryed only discuss opinion of my "experienced coleagues"? If no, i'll repeat: I'm a beginner in embedded sw. I understand, that I'm not a specialist in such a scope. But I know people (among them - Team manager of very succesfull firm), whose opinion is important for me. They've sad, that x51 is rather bad for C-programming. But they (and me too) use THIS architecture for large 'C'-projects, because of cost (tools and hw) and reliability of this one. As for me, I like C and C++, and I'll never say that asm is better than 'C' for large projects. About DPTR: tere are some mcu-s with 2 DPTRs (at89s8252 for ex.). Keil sw. have written optimized version of memcpy,memcmp and some others for such a models. Those versions work faster and take less instruction than analogs for 1 DPTR-architecture. It seems to me, that it's a good example of DPTR influence for code-size and code-speed. And it's a nice example of things, which are good in ASM and bad in 'C' for x51. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| asm vs C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| HLL | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| asm vs C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| C and other HLLs | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| modern - productive | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Lunch | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Speed writing vs speed running. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Belt or suspenders? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Learn C Then... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| beware | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| This advice is great | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I love C !!! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Easy migration | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 3rd party | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Having recently started converting... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Learning C for tte 8051 and 8-bit uC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Obviously there is a reason... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| as to reasons | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Obviously there is a reason... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 8051 vs C :) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 8051 efficiency | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| a 51 for handling large amount of data | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 8051 vs C - answer is wrong | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| addendum to post Andys above | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| asm.vs.C forever | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| click, click, click | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Eh?? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 8051 vs C - answer is wrong | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Don't believe all you hear! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the C myth | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| myth | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Then Don't Do that | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Exactly! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| why only? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Right tool for the Job | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| asm VS C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Which C? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Handly, But | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Both i think | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Neither! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Compiler on a floppy? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why do people use C? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Code Complete | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Ironic | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: asm VS C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| re:asm vs C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| derivatives of same | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| portability | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| re: portability | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| (non-)portability | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| re: | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
re: | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| What do you want? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| HLL | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Personal dislike... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| A comment to ASM versus C | 01/01/70 00:00 |