Jump to content

FredericG

EstablishedMember
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About FredericG

  • Rank
    Newbrie

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://users.telenet.be/FredericGoddeeris/
  • ICQ
    0
  1. Whas this issue solved? I sometimes have the same issue... I am using version 6.85 Frederic
  2. I can give any arbitrary value and this will not collide with other variables? I need this in the ISR, so that more efficient code is generated. I have sometimes seen that the amount of code decreases while I added some code and the other way around. Could this be explained by another distribution of the variables over the banks? Thanks, Frederic
  3. Is there a way to force a variable to be allocated in a specific bank? Thanks, Frederic
  4. I have sent you the project some time ago, did you get it? Thanks, Frederic
  5. u16_t timestamp; t1con.TMR1ON = 0; // stop timer MAKESHORT(timestamp, tmr1l, tmr1h); en_of_pulse = timestamp; <<==== causes warning I am not an expert, but I think I have seen compilers that have pragma's that give hints to compiler about these things. Thanks for the workaround, I can for sure live with that solution Frederic
  6. } while (i<(5+1)); 0CDB 0813 MOVF get_wp_00000_1_i, W 0CDC 3C06 SUBLW 0x06 0CDD 3C00 SUBLW 0x00 0CDE 0213 SUBWF get_wp_00000_1_i, W 0CDF 1803 BTFSC STATUS,C 0CE0 3A06 XORLW 0x06 0CE1 1D03 BTFSS STATUS,Z 0CE2 2CD0 GOTO label151 0CE3 label152 versus: } while (i<6); 0CDB 3006 MOVLW 0x06 0CDC 0213 SUBWF get_wp_00000_1_i, W 0CDD 1C03 BTFSS STATUS,C 0CDE 2CD0 GOTO label151 I don't have the courage to delve into this, but it have a feeling that when I write (5+1) the compiler starts treating it as a signed value... } while (i<(unsigned char)(5+1)); 0CDB 3006 MOVLW 0x06 0CDC 0213 SUBWF get_wp_00000_1_i, W 0CDD 1C03 BTFSS STATUS,C 0CDE 2CD0 GOTO label151 The variable i is also unsiged. Frederic
  7. I have an application framework and drivers residing in multiple .c files. In order to switch between the actual application and a test-application (that test the framework) I made a construction like this: //#include "appl_test.c" #include "appl.c" void main(void) { // generic init code application() } the files appl_test.c and appl.c each have an implementation for the application() function This works. application() never returns and in order to save a place on the call-stack I tried making the function inline. In this case the ram is overfilled. Why does this happen? Thanks, Frederic
  8. A macro like MAKESHORT can initialize a variable but the compiler does not know that and generates a warning. Is there a way to solve this without initializing the variable explicitly? Frederic
  9. Which version of the compiler do you use?Your code compiles fine when V6.83 is used. Regards Dave I was still using 6.6 as 6.7 made my code bigger (pointer operations I think) I now switched to 6.83 and it works fine. Frederic
  10. I had it again. Dave, I have sent a tar of the project. Recompiling did not work. Removing some old useless code did help Frederic
  11. I moved to another PC yesterday and installed 6.7 instead of the 6.6 I have been using. The problem is that an application that just fitted in a 16F648 does no longer fit; overfilled by more than 200 words if I remembered well. Are there perhaps other options I need to use? As a reference I suppose you could use the project i have sent you a few weeks ago regarding the strange linker error. Frederic
  12. I have it agian, I have frozen the project in a tar-file . Where do I send it to? Frederic
  13. I also have observed this problem several times. Recompiling everything did not work, but moving the code did work... When I have it again, would it be useful that I send the complete project? Thanks, Frederic
×
×
  • Create New...