4 ms·

Can somebody shed some light on it, why embedded companies (speak Microchip etc) have not switched to clang/llvm? It must cost them quite a bit to maintain thei

Can somebody shed some light on it, why embedded companies (speak Microchip etc) have not switched to clang/llvm? It must cost them quite a bit to maintain their own compiler stack and it is not very good. Fun example: a customer of mine initialized a variable within a loop and that resulting program just didn't work as expected (which it did with the same code on my desktop with gcc). As soon as he moved the variable out of the loop the program worked as expected.

gumby 10y ago
gcc and llvm weren't designed for the constraints of 8-bit (or 16-bit) targets. The support for 32-bit machines is quite good (and these days some of Atmels ARM parts are cheaper than some of their AVR ones!). Also, for the extremely low cost parts (small AVRs, PIC etc) the margins on the parts is very low which doesn't fund a lot of software development. And hardware companies often don't have much software development resource.