| ??? 11/30/07 11:18 Read: times |
#147635 - Thanks for your help Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Just to let you know that I've fixed it
As I've been looking at it though it might be better practise to leave the table in constant memory and to create a new table for the required offset (for Hst, Vst, Hact and Vact). This should be a more elegant solution |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Dallas DS89C450 - placing a large array into xram | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| of course it does | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| OP is using large memory model | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yep - I'm using the large memory model | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| large memory model and timing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I'm using the XRAM inside the DS89C450 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Do Not Forget pdata | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I'll look into this | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Divide and conquer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Thanks - I will try this | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| one other thing ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You're welcome | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| We've fixed it | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| It's been a while... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Thanks - That's fixed it! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Thanks for your help | 01/01/70 00:00 |