[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-libc-dev] Question on Optimizations with Linking

From: Paul Schlie
Subject: Re: [avr-libc-dev] Question on Optimizations with Linking
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 20:10:51 -0500
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/

> From: Russell Shaw <address@hidden>
> I had the idea that instead of having single large libraries such as
> stdio and libm, they could be made of say a dozen parts (even one per
> large function) with reduced or enhanced implementations of various
> functions, so rom spaced isn't filled with unused code. The default
> linking could use a standard stdio or libm. It might not be worth
> doing for things that are easily done in C by the user.

- yes, ideally unutilized code should be dead-striped; but doubt
  fragmenting the libraries is a reasonable solution; as correspondingly
  a basic level of standard function implementation is likely all that's
  minimally necessary and typically desirable for an avr class machine
  application (and ideally implemented in C themselves as the compiler
  optimization for the target improves).

  (as if one wants or expects more, a different processor is likely
  a better choice)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]