It's time to do some work on you're compiler. It generates the same code it did 20 years ago. I have to do tricks, instead of writing normal portable code, to get it to generate good code or just use inline assembler. This of course is nothing new, I've been telling you this for almost a decade. Keep in mind that all Intel processors are little endian and that you're compiler generates big endian code, why? You should at least offer a compiler switch to select endianness. Why don't you support C++ and MISRA? Oh and BTW IAR does all of the above TODAY! So clearly they haven't been standing still. (Notice who wrote the paper.)
www.eetimes.com/.../The-Inefficiency-of-C--Fact-or-Fiction-
Oh and BTW IAR does all of the above TODAY!
Use IAR, then. It's called competition. If enough people switch from Keil to IAR, maybe Keil will scratch their heads and think what they can do to win customers back. If people don't switch, then maybe they simply don't need a better compiler from Keil?
So I'm suppose to pay for annual support (for decades) that provides no updates to the compiler (they do add parts and make changes to the IDE)? And then pay for another compiler on top of that because compeditors actually do development work? Therein lies the problem, both have extended the C language and I'd have to rewrite my legacy code instead of being able to reuse it. So because I've been using Keil for some 25 years I now have to go elsewhere to get a modern tool? I want a tool that can detect more problems at complile time (C++ type checking is a step toward Lint, MISRA is also useful as a methodology). Plus Keil (Arm) are in bed with vendors who's chips I use and switching compilers for lack of support would put me further out on the support limb. I just want a tool developer to actually develope their tool instead of charging maintance and not fix bugs or move forward.
I just want a tool developer to actually develope their tool instead of charging maintance and not fix bugs or move forward. we can discuss, ad nausem, which features are fitting for a compiler for an 8 bit system, but WHAT BUGS
Erik
Plus Keil (Arm) are in bed with vendors who's chips I use and switching compilers for lack of support would put me further out on the support limb
you seem to be a "C is C" guy, what does it matter which compiler a chip manufacturer is "in bed with"
PS re tool vendors: I know of no instance where the competitor(s) do(es) not have (a) feature(s) that I would prefer to my chosen (to me most attractiven) tool
It's been many years now since I reported a bug that wasn't fixed so I've forgotten it now because I designed around it. They did give me a free year of support to no avail, they didn't fix the bug in either year.
Ah the point here is that the vendor got in bed with Keil and corrupted their hardware to be compatible with the compiler. Meaning that all the standard 8051 registers were little endian while all the proprietary extended architecture registers were big endian, what a nightmare to write code for.
"Ah the point here is that the vendor got in bed with Keil and corrupted their hardware to be compatible with the compiler. Meaning that all the standard 8051 registers were little endian while all the proprietary extended architecture registers were big endian, what a nightmare to write code for."
Your text clearly indicates that you don't know the subject and is based on factless false assumptions.
"Your text clearly indicates that you don't know the subject and is based on factless false assumptions."
While your ignorant comment is ambiguous enough to have no meaning at all, even the FAEs of the manufacturer (who shall remain nameless) recognized what I pointed out to them. If a Keil person wants clarification then I would be more than happy to provide them the facts since I've already done so in the past.
And I can without doubt say that you do not know the 8051 as well as myself since you are not John Wharton. I have done countless projects with the 8051 family over more than 25 years.
Meaning that all the standard 8051 registers were little endian
No, they aren't, and never were. None of the standard 8051 as much as has an endianness to speak of.
I have done countless projects with the 8051 family over more than 25 years.
And you appear to be on a mission to prove that despite all conventional wisdom to the contrary, a person can actually be wrong about a fundamental aspect of their field of work for all those 25 years --- and proud of it.
Can you explain how Keil is and has been the only compiler vendor for the 8051 that has tried to make it little endian inspite of its own architecture and history while everyone else has implemented it correctly?
View all questions in Keil forum