this probably some optimization issue. Try different -O options.
The thing I know for sure is that run time performance now is much better. ~d On Wednesday 27 November 2002 15:07, Steve Underwood wrote: > Hi all, > > I usually find that mspgcc produces smaller and faster code than the IAR > compiler (at least for integer code). Today I tried building the TCP/IP > code that can be found for the IAR compiler at the TI web site, and for > mspgcc in the mspgcc CVS. I was surprised to find it took 10.6K bytes > with mspgcc, but only 8.6K bytes with the IAR compiler. Does anyone know > why this particular program produces such results? > > Regards, > Steve > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Get the new Palm Tungsten T > handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! > http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0002en > _______________________________________________ > Mspgcc-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
