| ??? 12/03/04 18:47 Read: times |
#82488 - AJMP is 2 bytes LJMP is 3 Responding to: ???'s previous message |
The one advantage of an AJMP id that it occupy one less byte of program space than a LJMP. In the olden days, when chips actually cost money - today they are free in comparison - we tried to squeeze our stuff into 2k, 4k or whatever to use as cheap a chip as possible and there sometimes AJMP came riding in on a white horse and rescued us by saving a few bytes.
Also, there are/was? some derivatives with 2k or less code memory and no extenal memory capability (I seem to remember a 751) that did not even support LJMP. Erik |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| sjmp vs ajmp | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| as you said | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Different jmps | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| re:AJMP, SJMP | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| AJMP is 2 bytes LJMP is 3 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| LJMP was not the question | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| AJMP vs SJMP | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Relocable. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| relocatable | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re:Relocatable | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| relocatable - not in a 51 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Relocatable Code is Valid | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Not JMPs, relocatable | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I can anticipate all kinds of situations | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| If I can devise concepts others will too | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| "driver". | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: driver | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
maybe... maybe not. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 16M derivatives... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| SJMP is 2 bytes | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Maybe he means additional bytes | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| yes. | 01/01/70 00:00 |