On Tue, May 25, 1999 at 10:24:06AM -0700, Bob Blick wrote:
> Has anyone come up with a decent workaround for using inline
> assembly in HiTech C when the optimizer screws it up? Compiling the

Why bother with a work-around? The problem here is that the optimizer
is broken, pure and simple, and needs to be fixed. It has changed the meaning
of your code, and that just won't do. If you find anything else like this,
please let us know!

In case you're interested, the problem was that the code that looked at
the btfss and saw that it could be optimized to a btfsc with one jump
removed (preserving the number of cycles is NOT an optimizer priority)
failed to look at the previous instruction, which is also a skip.

I've fixed it, and the fix will be in the next patch, due out as soon
as we've finished testing, but if you want the fix in the meantime,
email me PRIVATELY (or email support@htsoft.com).

> Needless to say it no longer has the timeout working. There is no "keep
> hands off" directive.

This is something that's needed - the optimizer already leaves nops alone
(figures if you put it there it must be for a reason) but a general directive
to leave alone an instruction would also be useful, and I'll get that
looked into.

Regards, Clyde

--
Clyde Smith-Stubbs               |            HI-TECH Software
Email: clyde@htsoft.com          |          Phone            Fax
WWW:   http://www.htsoft.com/    | USA: (408) 490 2885  (408) 490 2885
PGP:   finger clyde@htsoft.com   | AUS: +61 7 3355 8333 +61 7 3355 8334
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HI-TECH C: compiling the real world.