Corrections below. Sorry!

----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Ammerman <RAMMERMAN@PRODIGY.NET>
To: <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2000 9:29 PM
Subject: Re: [PIC]: 16C76/CCS vs. 18C252/Hi-Tech


> > Indirect function calls have proved to be particularly difficult
> > on the 18C, fortunately they are not something that gets used a
> > lot.
>
> I should think an indirect function call would be TRIVIAL on an 18C and
> rather difficult on other PIC processors:
>
> given:
>
> void f(void)
> {
> }
>
> void (*g)(void);    // g is a pointer to a func
>
> // Assign pointer to variable
> g = f;
>
> movlw    low(f)
> movwf    _g
> movlw      high(f)
> movwf    _g+1
>
> // Call thru pointer:
> (*g)()
>
>     call call_thru_g
>

> call_thru_g:
>     push
>     movf     _g,w
>     movwf  tosl
>     movf     _g+1,w
>     movwf  tosh
>     return
>

> Bob Ammerman
> RAm Systems
> (contract development of high performance, high function, low-level
> software)
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
> (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics
>
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics