Hi Andy,
I looked over the code a little closer and found that my Keil background got the best of me.

It turns outh that the Raisonance syntax is a little different for example:
xdata at 0x1000 unsigned char fred;
xdata at 0x0005 unsigned char tom;
xdata at 0x1005 int dick;

Are correct under Raisonance. The same functionality under Keil would be:
xdata unsigned char fred _at_ 0x1000;
xdata unsigned char tom _at_ 0x0005;
xdata unsigned int dick _at_ 0x1005;

Our tools accept the Keil syntax just fine but the former example is the preferred method.

Another note using the "at" keyword in the Raisonance tools to locate the code of a function is valid. So a programmer could do the following:

at 0x8000 char highfunc()
{
return ();
}

This will locate the function at 0x8000 for the programmer.

I hope this clears up the differences between Raisonance and Keil with regards to the "at" keyword.

Andy Neil wrote:
-------------------------------
Yes, that was my earlier question:
was it supposed to be "real" Raisonance code (in which case it's not the same as Keil) or just "pseudo code"

Not knowing Raisonance, I wasn't sure.

But now I know.

Thanks.