> * How many of y'all use the CVASM16 assembler on > a regular basis? Yo! Although I use the HiTech one more and more (part of the C package). > * If you do, what are the advantages/disadvantages? I use Microchip mnemonics. The advantage is that it supports both Parallax and Microchips. > on them; if you feed it MPASM code, do you find > that you frequently have to hand process the code > before you use it, or does most code work with If macros or conditionals are used, then yes, you need to work it over first. Going in the other direction, though, isn't that bad since you can use #define's to get the Microchip asm to support the CV's bit definitions, etc. > minimal tweaking? Do you find that if you modify > code for CVASM16 and then try to take it back to > MPASM that you have to do any back-porting? If See above. > you stick to the CV-specific "8051-like" instructions, > again -- are code samples rare? Do you have much > trouble porting code samples from other 8051 chips? We have one guy who came here with only 8051 background. Many of his code library routines worked as-is or with minimal change. > decicsion? If you use MPASM on the CVM, do > you find this putting you at any sort of > significant disadvantage? It shouldn't. I've used all three assemblers here, and CVASM and MPASM are both fine. >I've been using MPASM for some stuff, and for some >stuff (including a commercial package -- emWare -- >that comes as MPASM source) I'll probably have to >continue using MPASM for some time. But I was just >trying to decide if it was worth the trouble to >learn CVASM16 as well. If you're already using MPASM, you shouldn't change. (Sorry, Jerry). Not until CVASM supports macros and conditionals (which I've been asking for for 4 years at least, even volunteering to add them to the assembler gratis but was always turned down.) Andy ================================================================== Montana Design Tech Support - http://www.montanadesign.com ==================================================================