| ??? 09/23/05 20:20 Read: times |
#101470 - RET to a different address Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Thanks for the response.
That is the "standard" way that I thought I had to use, but I'm trying to avoid the long list of "jc crt" after each character fetch, especially since the destination address will often be more then a short jump can handle, creating even messier code. My main (calling) routine checks each character as they come in to look for a recognizable string and if an unexpected carriage return happens midway through the string, I just want to abort the whole thing. My question is: is the way I'm proposing to do it technically ok or is there a hidden flaw that could cause trouble? |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| RET to a different address | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| here is how pseudocode | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RET to a different address | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| no flaw, but 1.000.000 gotchas | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| That's what I wanted to know | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yes | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| "clever" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| OT: my wife | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| no flaw, but seriously not recommended | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| experience | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| reload SP | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| restoring stack | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Recognisable string | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| named return value | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Bad Practice | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Well phrased | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| What I am doing with it | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| try...catch | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| setjmp / longjmp | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| when to try ... catch | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the borderline | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Promises | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| who cares if an exceptiom is "acceptable | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Parsing input data | 01/01/70 00:00 |