| ??? 02/28/07 01:27 Read: times |
#133901 - What??? Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Ajay Bhargav said:
even if you use most of your ram, your program will behave abnormal from the required behavior.
Reason: Overwriting of certain variables! Nonsense! Unless you are playing silly tricks (eg, manually assigning absolute addresses), you will not get variables overwriting each other - rather, the tools will give you a "Memory Overflow" error message. So its not only important to keep the space for stack but it is also necessary to keep room for variables, some gap is required. No. this is not true. Saving ram space for constant variables can be done by declaring them in code space Yes, this is true. So this save the use of ram, but still, it save 3 byte pointer pointing to this variable Eh?? What have pointers got to do with it?? Hope this help I don't think so, unfortunately. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| using 256 bytes of ram 0f 8052 in keil | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| you can't, the most you can get is 248 (256 - one | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Keil internal ram | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| resons for extending memory | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| it is, and thus it takes many reads | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| lookup | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not necessarily correct | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| There is limit | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Try it if you think its wrong :) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| wht a bunch of gobbelygook! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Qualifers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Sloppy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Maybe | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| problem solved | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You Must Read | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RTFMs | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| What??? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The solution could be as simple as: | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| just note about size | 01/01/70 00:00 |