Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
???
12/18/09 10:05
Read: times


 		 #171715 - this sort of job is best done in ssembler
Responding to: ???'s previous message
Jan Waclawek said:
... this sort of job is best done in inline assembler

Actually, this is best done in assembler - completely away from 'C'.

If you do it inline, you are still wrapped in the trappings of 'C'.

- this not standard C and is specific for your compiler, so either tell us what compiler are you using, or consult the manual.

Absolutely

C aficionados might come up with some function pointer-based solution, but that's no nicer, and machine-specific (read: non-portable) either.

Agreed! So don't mess about; just do it in assembler - where it belongs!


List of 33 messages in thread
TopicAuthorDate
ljmp in C            01/01/70 00:00      
   DEAD WRONG in assembler            01/01/70 00:00      
      It would be better to describe what you need to achieve            01/01/70 00:00      
         explanation            01/01/70 00:00      
            if I understand correctly what you want...            01/01/70 00:00      
               this sort of job is best done in ssembler            01/01/70 00:00      
               re: if I understand correctly what you want...            01/01/70 00:00      
            Function pointer            01/01/70 00:00      
            not a reset            01/01/70 00:00      
               pardon?            01/01/70 00:00      
                  jump to zero and reset            01/01/70 00:00      
                     a watchdog reset does not necessarily perform a "full" reset            01/01/70 00:00      
                        ljmp 0000H tested with SDCC            01/01/70 00:00      
                           That's exactly what OP needed, not "reset"            01/01/70 00:00      
                           TOTALLY ABSOLUTELY WRONG!!            01/01/70 00:00      
                              EA=0            01/01/70 00:00      
                                 it depends            01/01/70 00:00      
                                    which leads me to            01/01/70 00:00      
                                    you prove my point            01/01/70 00:00      
                                       re: you prove my point            01/01/70 00:00      
                                          it will not do what you expect RELIABLY!!            01/01/70 00:00      
                                 I do take care of re-initializing            01/01/70 00:00      
                                    double, pls ignore            01/01/70 00:00      
                                    you don't get it, do you            01/01/70 00:00      
                           Does it really?            01/01/70 00:00      
                              Yes it does (sometimes)            01/01/70 00:00      
                                 Tail-end recursion            01/01/70 00:00      
                                 optional?            01/01/70 00:00      
                                    it's the default            01/01/70 00:00      
                                       ljmp in C            01/01/70 00:00      
                                          Have you confirmed that?            01/01/70 00:00      
                                             call != jump            01/01/70 00:00      
   I've seen some.            01/01/70 00:00      

Back to Subject List