Peter Jansen wrote:
Hi Steve,
Some has become irrelevant, as better ways to achieve the same thing
now exist (e.g. the RESERVE_RAM attribute to main(), is mentioned,
but the old messy ways of achieving much the same thing aremore
prominent). Some has a strong Russian accent :-).
I have some issues with the RESERVE_RAM attribute of main, mspgcc is
the only gcc that uses that attribute and there are other ways of
doing the same thing. It makes compiling to other platforms more
difficult using the same code. I prefer the modified linker script
option.
If you don't like RESERVE_RAM you don't have to use it. The linker
script option is still there. However, I think most people consider
RESERVE_RAM a simpler, more expressive, and more self documenting way to
say what you want. Messing about with linker scripts is a PITA, and
when I don't touch a project for a few weeks Ican't remember what fiddly
stuff like that was needed to make things work. I don't buy the
portability argument for not using RESERVE_RAM. Anything that needs to
use it is far from portable, anyway.
Regards,
Steve
