Re: ANN: SwiftX for ARM and i386

Sorry for not replying to the OP, I missed the thread :(

>> The Thumb instruction set really only pays off under the following
>> circumstances
>> 1) The data bus is 8 or 16 bits wide
Also with 32bit => 2 insn per fetch. Many ARM based CPU have at least
a small cache for this.

>> 2) There is no instruction cache
Even with. Twice (ok, 1.9 times) as many instructions fit into it.

>> 3) Instruction memory space is limited.
*lol* the we-have-megas-of-memory-so-we-dont-care-for-code-size
argument.
This can't be beaten.

>From my point of view ( I am writing assembly RTOS since 4 years for
different companies) I must say:
1) You can do most things in thumb as good as in ARM.
2) Thumb is even though it is limited faster because its is less code.
3) Size matters.

>Can you explain why Thumb is not important in your apps?  Is it because
>with features like TCP/IP you are already using enough memory that Thumb

If this would be his argument, it is a poor one, because he would
benefit from compiling the TCP/IP stack to thumb code.

>What do you mean by "deep embedded".  To me this means small, controller
>type apps. 

To me as well. And very very cost sensitive. 



---
42Bastian
Do not email to [EMAIL PROTECTED], it's a spam-only account :-)
Use <same-name>@epost.de instead !