simulavr-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Simulavr-devel] Settings for stackpointer


From: Klaus
Subject: Re: [Simulavr-devel] Settings for stackpointer
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2016 21:55:18 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0

Hi Thomas,

be relaxed ... :-) Controller with 3 level stack instead of a real stack
pointer are obsolete.

Yes, you can't buy them anymore. But there are maybe some people which have some devices "on stack" :-) I also have some at90s1200 and maybe someday I will use them... maybe also not, I don't know.


But, we haven't this parts in simulavr!

??? I know that I myself wrote a 3 byte hw stack implementation and I believe that this was? in the source. So I see no reason why we should remove working code. There is nothing to maintain I believe.

So I simply want to ask to not change things again without any need. If something disturbs new features, we should talk before the new features break the old.

BTW: Can we start to develop new features on branches and merge later on the master? It is much easier to play around with the code base if we can go to an older version, merge some branches in and get the things to work. Cherry picking of single commits is not as easy I believe. :-)

I especially ask for that, because I want to create my own branch where I will get the old tcl interface and the old tracing stuff to work again. tcl and tracing are broken so I need some changes which maybe not for customer satisfaction. But I can't use the current simulavr for that features. Also the testcode written in TCL and the examples is unreadable for me. I don't know what was the reason for that changes. So I will create my own working branch in a few weeks or more. And if so, it is easier to get new features with merging branches and not by cherry picking unordered commits. I also need the decoded instructions in the more or less old version to have the trace info which was dropped from the current source.

And yes, it would be nice if we get some lines of documentation on new code. I already asked you :-) Do you have written some lines for your new pin/port extensions? :-)

Regards
 Klaus





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]