Hi there. I've always wanted to mix this:
http://www.futurlec.com/ET-STM32_Stamp.shtml
with some of this:
http://bit.ly/cD0JPS
to control my one of these:
http://www.traxxas.com/products/electric/rustler2006/gallery/3705-3qrtr-Black.jpg
and it sounds like a good opportunity to dogfood the
On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 12:24 +0100, Julian Brown wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 12:55:59 +0200
> Loïc Minier wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 07, 2010, Julian Brown wrote:
> > > Do
> > > you still have the code fragment handy (I don't rem
On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 13:09 +0100, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> On 07/09/10 13:01, Yao Qi wrote:
> >> * Investigate reduced alignment constraints?
> >
> > Any details on this?
>
> No, I just know that some targets like to align functions to
> cache-lines. This is a useful speed optimization, but does
Hi,
I tried linaro gdb branch just now,
$ bzr branch lp:gdb-linaro
parent branch is bzr+ssh://bazaar.launchpad.net/%2Bbranch/gdb-linaro/,
which looks strange.
In gcc-linaro, parent branch is
bzr+ssh://bazaar.launchpad.net/~linaro-toolchain-dev/gcc-linaro/4.5/
I thought parent branch of linaro
On 9/10/2010 2:17 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
> (int)((unsigned)c << 28) >> 28
>
> is invalid C, because the result of the unsigned->signed cast (needed
> to get arithmetic right shift) is undefined if the argument is >
> INT_MAX.
True, but undefined-ness (or, in this case, implementation-defined-ne
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
[...]
> lsl r0, r0, #28
> asr r0, r0, #28
> bx lr
>
> But I doubt gcc could ever become that smart.
Some pointed out to me that the tempting C equivalent
(int)((unsigned)c << 28) >>
