Hi all,
As mentioned before, I think the footprint of jal apps has increased.
There are good resons for this like:
- jalv2 supports multiple banks of ram and thus has to handle banking.
- jalv2 supports more complex vars and has to deal with those in
calculations (also when vars are in different banks).
- jallib provides more functionality
- jallib has better readable code
This is all valueble and so is code size ;)
The first (of probably many) example I came acros was a case of
checking of two bits within one register (asm is below):
if ((RCSTA_OERR == TRUE) | (RCSTA_FERR == TRUE)) then
This takes 12 lines (instructions?), since the compiler collects two
bits (wether the bits are true, i think) to a temp area and does the
OR from there. In old school jal, this would be done like:
if ((RCSTA & 0x11) != 0)
(
where 0x11 is just an example - it would be better if it was something like:
if ((RCSTA & ( OERR | FERR ) != 0)
)
This functional same code takes only 6 lines of code.
You could argue that 6 bytes is not worth any effort, but I think
there are a lot of similar situations.
Do you think code size is important enough to look into this and adapt
the source?
Joep
; 202 if ((RCSTA_OERR == TRUE) | (RCSTA_FERR == TRUE)) then --
frame/overr error
bcf v____bitbucket_29, 1 ; _btemp15
btfsc v_rcsta, 1 ; rcsta_oerr
bsf v____bitbucket_29, 1 ; _btemp15
bcf v____bitbucket_29, 2 ; _btemp16
btfsc v_rcsta, 2 ; rcsta_ferr
bsf v____bitbucket_29, 2 ; _btemp16
bcf v____bitbucket_29, 3 ; _btemp17
btfss v____bitbucket_29, 1 ; _btemp15
btfsc v____bitbucket_29, 2 ; _btemp16
bsf v____bitbucket_29, 3 ; _btemp17
btfss v____bitbucket_29, 3 ; _btemp17
goto l__l299
; 204 if ((RCSTA & 0x11) != 0) then -- frame/overr error
movlw 17
andwf v_rcsta,w
movwf v____temp_41
movf v____temp_41,w
btfsc v__status, v__z
goto
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jallib" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
