Re: Dumb question - 'code' words and register banks
Samuel Tardieu <[email protected]> 14 Nov 2004 21:57:30 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.forth.picforth |
|---|---|
| Organization | Avian Carrier & Friends |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
>>>>> "Sam" == Samuel Tardieu <[email protected]> writes: Sam> Maybe I should issue a warning when the right bank is not Sam> selected and if the bank is not restored at return. What do you Sam> think about it? I have implemented it and will release it in a few minutes, as PicForth 1.2. Incidentally, those new checks (warnings are fatal by default, see the manual) did underline an error in piceeprom.fs: interrupts were not properly suspended because the wrong bank was selected at this time! The changes since PicForth 1.1 are: ** Optimizations + "nip" now optimizes code such as "1 2 nip" by replacing it by "2". This situation can arise when a bit name is given and only the bit number is interesting. ** Enhancements + "picisr.fs" now include versions of "suspend-interrupts" and "restore-interrupts" that can be nested up to 256 levels. However this requires one more byte of memory (problem signaled by Alex Holden <[email protected]>). + PicForth will issue warnings (which by default are fatal) when a bank mismatch has been detected. ** Cleanups + Remove extra definition of "set-wrt". Reported by Jamie Lawson <[email protected]>. ** Bug fixes + Interrupts were not properly suspended during an EEPROM write. This has been found by the new bank mismatch detection code. Sam -- Samuel Tardieu -- [email protected] -- http://www.rfc1149.net/sam