The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: "D Poinsett"
Subject: Re: To C or not to C
Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 22:17:14 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
Please forgive me if I missed early parts of this thread where the following
questions may have been answered.
How many units are you planning to sell? What is the difference in cost of
the 1K vs. the 2K part? Of the two programs, which will be the easiest to
maintain? Are there routines that you developed that will be used later with
another chip from another manufacturer with a different instruction set? How
much development time have you spent on the assembler version vs. the C
version? What is that time worth compared to cost savings in the two chips?
Your program is small so it may not make too much difference which way you
go in this case but these are issues to think about especially when the
program gets a little bigger.
"Scott Campbell" wrote in message
> > To the OP; Is the C version using any standard C functions? This may
> > cause a lot more code being included from the standard C libraries.
> > You can check the .map file to see what's included.
> Well, we were using atoi, strcmp and strncmp but I have written these
> to cut down on code since we don't need general functions...
> At the moment, the C code is 1,249 bytes and the asm code is 757 bytes...
> Michael still sees this as too large as he was planning to get a 1KB chip
> instead of a 2KB chip to cut down on price a little...
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup