Re: Re[2]: [avr-gcc-list] Re: GCC-AVR Update (20082003)

[Joerg Wunsch]

As Denis Chertykov <address@hidden> wrote:

>> Nope, at the linker level it's sheer impossible.  
>
>It's wrong.
>This feature can be done in linker, precisely in bfd level.
>Such features called "relax".

Thanks for correcting me, Denis.  I should have written ``I
can't imagine how this would be done at the linker level.''

>Anybody welcome ! (I havn't a time and desire. I can help.)

Maybe, once i've got all those pending COFF bugs sorted out. :-/

Btw., for a motivation why this is inded a neat thing: the original
AVR butterfly C code fills up that ATmega169 to the limit, even when
compiled with the IAR (some larger music tables are commented out by
default already).  Since the code saving would be relatively large for
a 16 KB device, implementing this feature would help a lot to get at
least say 90 % of the original Atmel code into the butterfly when
compiling with gcc.  Right now, that Mexican guy had to take out the
entire `sound' module to make it fit at all.
-- 
J"org Wunsch                                           Unix support engineer
address@hidden        http://www.interface-systems.de/~j/