| ??? 06/14/11 06:30 Read: times |
#182650 - Different assemblers have different probabilities Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Andy Neil said:
Per Westermark said:
Missing the # is probably one of the most common 8051 assembler mistakes I guess that missing the qualifier (whatever it may be) to distinguish an immediate value from an address is probably quite common in any assembler...? Not all assembler languages are equal. At least from own experience, I'm way less likely to miss out when the assembler instruction uses [<addr>] than if it uses #<addr>. I must make two typing errors on the same line for the assembler to not detect a problem. The problem is worst when using an assembler that uses both $99 and #99. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| 8051 core quiz | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| quizes are out of fashion these days... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I did it.... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| thanks | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| missed CJNE | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| indeed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I guess a quite frequent oversight | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: optimize LJMPs to AJMPs, etc | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Maybe? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| caught again! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Most common 8051 assembly mistake? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Not just 8051? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Different assemblers have different probabilities | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Conceptual & Typographical errors | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| some assemblers do | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Readability helps | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
99's | 01/01/70 00:00 |