Lpc2000

Richard,


"The best Fortran programs are written after you spill the box of
cards; rewriting the code may be faster and better."

Been there. Done that. Thanks for the chuckle.

Dave

--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "rtstofer" <rstofer@...> wrote:
>
> --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "dsidlauskas1" <dsidlauskas@> wrote:
> >
> > Jaya,
> > 
> > Since the compiler knows that buf is a byte aligned object, woutldn't
> > it be resonable for the compiler to treat
> > 
> > (int *)&buf[i]
> > 
> > as 
> > 
> > (__packed int *)&buf[i]
> > 
> > In general, if non-naturaly aligned objects are promoted by a cast,
> > shouldn't, by default, the cast be of the proper non-aligned type?
> > 
> > BTW. Really appreciate your discussion of interupts on your web site.
> > 
> > Dave
> > 
> 
> I guess I don't see why the compiler should do anything.  You asked it
> to cast the ADDRESS of a byte in memory to an int * which is an
> address (by definition) and put it in another int * which is also an
> address.  No problem...  So far everything is just an address.
> 
> Until you actually use the pointer to grab the contents of memory
> there is no alignment issue.  And, on the i386 there still wouldn't be
> a problem because the i386 doesn't care about alignment, just
> endianness.  It is just a thing with the ARM (and others, I suppose)
> that alignment is a concern.
> 
> As to porting: well, it is likely that nearly every line of C code is
> suspect as almost everything is being done with pointers or structures
> or is hardware specific.  Getting the program to work again will be
> more of a challenge than simply rewriting it.  How big could it be if
> it originally ran on an 8 bit processor?  Unless it is a full O/S like
> CP/M and all of the utilities...
> 
> The best Fortran programs are written after you spill the box of
> cards; rewriting the code may be faster and better.
> 
> Richard
>