| ??? 03/21/05 10:28 Modified: 03/21/05 10:31 Read: times |
#90092 - why not Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Oleg Sergeev said:
I suggest to drop EQU for memory allocations... This sounds very similar to the old C.vs.asm song. I use 2051s for the smallest projects, and I find it adequate to have full control of what I have and where in those ridiculous 128 bytes RAM /2kB FLASH. I don't assume, I calculate used stack space, and so on. I often optimize code for speed/size based on absolute position of variables/arrays, relative position of variables to each other, and alignment of tables in code space. You may like it or not, I like it, please don't argue, I know all the drawbacks of it. This is the "little boy" approach - to spare money on parts one has to offer some programming comfort. Jan Waclawek |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| initializing SP to 7FH | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| why? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| To Oleg & Russell | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| To Mehdi | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| To Mehdi | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| why not | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| for example, please | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Oleg, why I do similar | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| here they are | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| well | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| well well | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| well, well - done | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| tight SRAM - use C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
- or assembler | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Stack pointer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| external stack | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| why not? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| SDCC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re:initializing SP to 7FH | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| very old assemblers only | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Let the assembler do the work! | 01/01/70 00:00 |