[A86] Re: SDCC v2.3.0

To: <assembly-86@lists.ticalc.org>
Subject: [A86] Re: SDCC v2.3.0
From: "Henk Poley" <HPoley@DDS.nl>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 15:24:23 +0200
Reply-To: assembly-86@lists.ticalc.org


> Van: David Phillips <david@acz.org>
> 
> > > Outputing text is not a problem.  There would be wrappers for rom
> > > calls that would merely define the calling conventions.  The function
> > > call overhead would be non existant, as compiler would essentially
> > > inline the function call.
> >
> > I'm afraid there's no Z80 compiler that has the 'inline' function (as
> > in GCC, etc.).
> 
> See, that's the problem with compilers.  If you look at modern day
> compilers, things like the "register" keyword are obsolete.  Watcom was
> like that, and I'd think gcc is the same way.  There is no "inline"
> keyword in C (did they add that in C99?), only C++. But it shouldn't be
> needed.

I think it IS needed. When you state that a routine should/could be
inlined, you also know that it can't be shure if you can call the routine
from the 'outside' (assembly routines, etc.). Normal (non-inline) routines
can always be called. At least on Z80 (!), for example on some other
targets of SDCC you then need to specify that the routine is reentrant.

	Henk Poley <><