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 18:42 Read: times	#171735 - That's exactly what OP needed, not "reset" Responding to: ???'s previous message

List of 33 messages in thread

Topic	Author	Date
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