delton@pro-carolina.cts.com (Don Elton) (11/20/88)
Anyone using the MPW 65816 cross assembler on a Mac SE? I'd be interested in hearing how it compares with ORCA/GS and specifically how much faster/nicer it is (if any). Of course, consider that I use a smart make utility with ORCA/GS and rarely do complete compiles of my programs and would have to add in the time to convert the code over to ProDOS to test on the GS so MPW would really have to fly to be worth the extra trouble so I assume there must be a break-even point in code size where the savings of MPW might be worth the trouble of using a cross-compiler. Comments? UUCP: [ sdcsvax nosc ] !crash!pro-carolina!delton ARPA: crash!pro-carolina!delton@nosc.mil INET: delton@pro-carolina.cts.com Pro-Carolina: 803-776-3936 (300-2400 baud, login as 'register') US Mail: 3207 Berkeley Forest Drive, Columbia, SC 29209-4111
keith@Apple.COM (Keith Rollin) (11/22/88)
In article <8811200516.AA22124@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-simasd!pro-carolina!delton@nosc.mil writes: >Anyone using the MPW 65816 cross assembler on a Mac SE? I'd be interested in >hearing how it compares with ORCA/GS and specifically how much faster/nicer it >is (if any). Of course, consider that I use a smart make utility with ORCA/GS >and rarely do complete compiles of my programs and would have to add in the >time to convert the code over to ProDOS to test on the GS so MPW would really >have to fly to be worth the extra trouble so I assume there must be a >break-even point in code size where the savings of MPW might be worth the >trouble of using a cross-compiler. > Jim and I used the MPW IIGS system very heavily for developing our Source Code Samples. I like it a lot. I don't know how fast it runs on an SE (we used II's), but I would imagine that it would still be faster than ORCA. Getting a multiple window editting system is nice, OMF 2.x format is supported directly by the linker, and the MAKE facility of MPW is great. Converting your APW source over shouldn't be a concern. The C is the same, and there is a utility that will convert your assembly for you. Keith Rollin UUCP: amdahl\ Developer Technical Support pyramid!sun !apple!keith Apple Computer decwrl/ BITNET: keith%apple.com@relay.cs.net "You can do what you want to me, but leave my computer alone!"
prw@meccsd.MECC.MN.ORG (Paul R. Wenker) (11/24/88)
In article <8811200516.AA22124@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-simasd!pro-carolina!delton@nosc.mil writes: >Anyone using the MPW 65816 cross assembler on a Mac SE? I'd be interested in >hearing how it compares with ORCA/GS and specifically how much faster/nicer it >is (if any). Of course, consider that I use a smart make utility with ORCA/GS >and rarely do complete compiles of my programs and would have to add in the >time to convert the code over to ProDOS to test on the GS so MPW would really >have to fly to be worth the extra trouble so I assume there must be a >break-even point in code size where the savings of MPW might be worth the >trouble of using a cross-compiler. The MPW environment is an order of magnitude better that ORCA/APW. We've used the MPW IIGS assembler/linker for two products now. Each of them were over 100k of assembly. Although we used Mac II's, an SE will work just fine. However, if you want to link a moderate sized file (greater than about 30k), you will want more than 1 meg of memory. Just to list a few of the benefits... 1) It's faster. Even taking into account your smart make utility and the conversion time (which is minimal), MPW would still be faster on any size file. 2) The editor is multi-window, flexible, and fast. 3) The make facility is wonderful. 4) The macro facility in the assembler is much better. 5) The shell supports regular expressions, shell scripts, and custom tools. 6) The linker produces OMF 2.0 files directly. No more compacting the output file when you are done. 7) You can create custom shell menus and menu items. -Paul Wenker prw@meccsd.MECC.MN.ORG -MECC, Technical Services