[fpc-devel] DIFF patch for changing to table driven processor definitions for ARM

Florian Klämpfl florian at freepascal.org
Sat Aug 27 20:49:35 CEST 2011

Am 27.08.2011 20:33, schrieb John Clymer:
> I assume I speak for others, but for those of us that have been working
> in the embedded field for a while, some of us prefer to roll our own
> support code, rather than rely on compiler supplied implementations. 
> Personnally, I've used 6 different ARM/Thumb2 cored processors in
> various projects.  I have NEVER used compiler or vendor provided library. 
> I prefer NOT to use them because they add overhead, complexity, and are
> often times innefficient.

Well, this is not about libraries but startup code and declarations of
hardware registers etc. which add no overhead.

> I thought OSS was about freedom of choice.  


> Mandating that end users
> follow a certain path removes their available choices.

If really needed, they can still downstrip an existing cpu unit and work
with a customized compiler. This is something a commercial compiler does
not allow .

> As far as custom linker maps - if one uses the Generic "controller" and
> tells the compiler to compile to object code, but NOT link.  Then one
> can provide their own linker script - with whatever crazy controller
> layout they desire.

This can be done with an existing cpu unit as well. After all, the code
*must* run on a real device.

The bare ram arm and it's memory map just looks random.

More information about the fpc-devel mailing list