Re: Re[2]: [avr-gcc-list] Re: GCC-AVR Update (20082003)

[E. Weddington]

> An  Atmel  engineer  here in Germany I spoke to on the 
phone yesterday
> confirmed  that  gcc  indeed  is "a really nice compiler" 
for AVR. But
> frankly  I  think  it  would take one order of magnitude 
less bugs and

I would debate that, as in general there haven't been that 
many AVR-specific bugs. The last few months have shown a 
small increase in bugs affecting the AVR port, but I think 
has more to do with getting the 3.3 (and 3.3.1) release out.


> maybe  a 1/3 or 1/2 cut in code size on gcc's part 
(impossible I know)
> to  really start sucking away customers from IAR and stir 
things up at
> Atmel.  With  regard  to  bugs I'm not so sure, but with 
code size I'd
> have to quote grand ma: "Not gonna happen". ;)
> 

GCC doesn't seem to generate code that's twice as big as 
IAR. I would more go to a 1/3 cut in code size. And from 
what I've heard of a user who has used both, this seems to 
be the biggest issue: code size.

With the new things that GCC is working to get in, it 
should help in adding new optimizations. However, these 
things won't be getting in until probably 3.4 or 3.5. :-/

Eric