What is the problem with SDCC 3.3?
I'm using it with my CP/M coding experiments here https://github.com/hkzlab/sdcc-cpm-example/tree/master, and it is (apparently) working.
My compiled code executes on the SBC V2...
SDCC for the Z80 installs and runs both under Linux and Windows for me.
I have used it both places. One tip: the newest release is impossible
to use. Use release 3.0.0, not 3.3.0. One thing about SDCC, is
specifying the "machine" every time. Every compile line needs "-mz80"
on it, otherwise it produces code for the 8051. This requirement is
best handled through a Makefile. SDCC has no 'make' facility itself,
but I use NMAKE under Windows from an old release of Micro$oft-C.
WMAKE, from Watcom (below) is also a good 'make' facility. One negative
about SDCC is that the assembler, SDASZ80, uses a syntax that is not
compatible with TASM; but it does produce relocatable modules. Further,
there is a library facility.
Keep trying to get SDCC working; it is the compiler of choice, in my
opinion, for Z80/Z180.
For the 80386, there are several flavors of Open Watcom. This is what
was used for the SBC-188. I think you can install versions that will
produce real-mode code (8086/8 or 80186/8) or protected mode 32-bit
code. It is best to run it under Windows in all cases. A good bit of
SBC-188 BIOS code is written with Watcom-C. I don't use the version
that produces 32-bit code. The SBC-188 uses NASM for the assembly code,
making all the tools to create the BIOS open source, hence, free.
DJDeLorie's port of GCC to extended DOS is good for writing 32-bit code
to run under DOS or Windows. For DOS, a 32-bit free extender is
included. The compiler is sometimes known as DJGPP. There is a whole
library of U**x utilities available for DOS/Win. It is not quite up to
the latest GCC release, but great if you want to run 32-bit code from a
DOS box. It is huge, and a bit of a bear to install, but well worth the
On 01/17/2014 03:07 AM, Ants Pants wrote:
> Hey Guys,
> after allot of searching and mucking around with some compilers that
> seem weird in the way they work, that i cant get working properly
> (SDCC).. does anyone have any other suggestions for me? im looking for
> a C compiler for the Z80 that will give me as good as possible code to
> binary(asm).. i.e. i dont want to have to write full asm code in a C
> function with the ASM directive because i cant coutput to a memory
> address or a hardware address in the z80 or something silly.. or a
> compiler that can link together multiple .h or .c files?
> any ideas guys?
> or at a complete loss does anyone know of a soft core that is GCC
> compliant? or even a decent old (soft) CPU that has separate Memry I/O
> that has a nice C compiler?
> this is my forever problem;em.. i cant seem to get the CPU im working
> with to have a nice compiler so i can be productive? i dont want to
> move to a all in one chip mike a microchip or atmel arm.. i would love
> to stick with the Z80 for now if possible.. hench the search for a
> nice C compiler
> BTW John.. does the 80386 have a nice C compiler for it?.. i could
> almost see myself upgrading thee system to accept a 80386 if i have a
> suitable C compiler??
> any suggestions met with arms open!
> thanks guys
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "N8VEM-S100" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to n8vem-s100+...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "N8VEM-S100" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to n8vem-s100+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.