On 21 August 2010 17:27, John P. Baker <jbaker...@comporium.net> wrote:
> There is no problem when the literal is specified as H'nn', F'nn', or of any > other form which requires halfword or better alignment. > > Likewise, there is no problem with a binary, character, or hexadecimal > literal whose representation consists of an even number of bytes. > > However, a halfword aligned literal whose representation consists of an odd > number of bytes will cause the following literal to start on an odd address, > which is not addressable by an instruction using relative addressing. This stretches and digresses from the point a bit... By definition, any such following literal will have an odd number of bytes, and if it must be addressed by a relative instruction, the same techniques that have been recommended for the original problem apply just as well. > It is not reasonable to tell a customer that they cannot use literals. No one is saying any such thing. By analogy, do you think the assembler should force alignment of non literal constants if they happen to be referenced by a relative instruction? Tony H.
