We are running a survey to help us improve the experience for all of our members. If you see the survey appear, please take the time to tell us about your experience if you can.
Hello, I was browsing through older posts that deal with the painful issue of portability (http://www.keil.com/forum/docs/thread8109.asp). I was (and still am) a big advocate of programming as much as possible conforming to the C standard, and having a layered structure that allowed "plugging-in" other hardware. But I have come to change my mind recently. I am reading the "ARM system developer's guide" (excellent book by the way. I'm reading it because I want to port some C167 code to an ARM9 environment) in which chapter 5 discusses writing efficient C code for an ARM. The point is, and it is fairly demonstrated, that even common, innocent looking C code can either be efficient of very inefficient on an ARM depending on specific choices made, let alone another processor used! So, if we are talking about squeezing every clock cycle out of a microcontroller - I do not believe that portability without ultimately littering the code is possible!
Jack: This forum is not threaded, even if it for some reason allows people to place answers in the middle.
The intent was good but the feasibility study was inadequate.
Please avoid that attempt and instead post at the bottom - since you use a lot of quotes, it really doesn't matter if there will be a number of posts in between your post and the one you are responding to.
Given that new posts are highlighted I don't see how that would offer any real benefit, but I'm willing to give it a try.