| ??? 01/11/05 00:26 Read: times |
#84704 - Why don't you ask Philips? Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Mikkel C. Simonsen said:
I have just received some sample code from Philips ... Does anyboady know what compiler/assembler Philips uses? Have you asked Philips that question? Removing that line causes the error to go away, but what does $CASE do? At a guess, it probably has something to do with enabling or disabling case-sensitivity? And now the C problems. The two files include line like this one:
interrupt(1) using(1) void T0_Interrupt(void) Well, that is clearly not Keil C51 syntax! One of the files also includes this declaration:
rom char key_tbl[][] = { { K04, K03, K02, K01 }, // row 0 { K08, K07, K06, K05 }, // row 1 { K12, K11, K10, K09 }, // row 2 { K16, K15, K14, K13 }, // row 3 }; and neither is that! A strange line in the main file was this:
_rom unsigned char UCFG1 _at (0xFD00) = 0x7B; /* 6 clock - internal 6 MHz brownout = 2,5V */ That looks like something for the programmer? What makes you say that? Surely the UCFG1 register must be documented in the chip's Data Sheet, User Manual, or whatever? Does anyboady know what compiler/assembler Philips uses? Are you sure you have no documentation that specifies this? If not, it is certainly pretty poor of Philips to use vendor-specific syntax without specifying the vendor! Have a word with your contact at Philips. If (s)he wants someone to make a Keil-compatible version of this (or maybe just to document the vendor-dependencies), you may give him/her my details... |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Philips sample code/Keil problems | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why don't you ask Philips? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: Why don't you ask Philips? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: Ask Philips? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: Ask Philips? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Link | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: useful App Note | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 87 89 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: 87 89 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Tasking. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: Tasking | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Keil? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: Keil | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Linking | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Linked! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: Linked | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Linking | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: Tasking | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| reply | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Dunfields or Tasking? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Tasking | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 2D Array problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Compiler can deduce size. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| can, but doesn't have to! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Fully Bracketed Initializers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Ask Keil | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| C99 vs. C90 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Compiler deducing array size | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Tasking Compiler deduces array size! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Which Array? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| That Array! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
One More Test | 01/01/70 00:00 |