From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ef33c33c4f98bde1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: lutz@iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)
Subject: Re: Compiler for Z80/6510
Date: 1999/11/25
Message-ID: <slrn83ptfb.kn.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 552859633
Distribution: world
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: <slrn83nahf.m1.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>
 <383c6fed.458467@news.fiam.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Organization: IKS GmbH Jena
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.5.7 (UNIX)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-11-25T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

* Wil wrote:
>* lutz@iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke) wrote:
>>Does anyone know a working Ada95 compiler for Z80 (U880) and 6510/6502
>>microcontrolers?

>Back when I was still programming the 6502 in assembly, they were running at
>less than a MHz/sec. I wouldn't even program this beast in C. Forget Ada!

The common experience is, that high level languages result in slow and
bloated code. But this must not be true. There is no reason for such
compilers despite laziness of developers (it's an expensive development).

For most modern processors hand written assembler will be slower than a
compiler output. The complexity of scheduling and computation dependencies
can be handled by a human in hundreds of hours, but a compiler can do this
in a few seconds in respect to all possible optimization methods.

You might produce a better code for a small time critical loop but not
overall.