> Hi, Olin, I looked at your code and it's well thought out. My experience
> using the linker was not good solely because I couldn't seem to get the
> macro expansion working, hence my .lst files were a bit useless. I would
> like to go this route though. What's you experience with macro expansion?

Since the debugger works with the source files, the list files don't have
much purpose.  Every once in a great while you have to look in the list file
to understand an assembly error message because it is in a macro, or you
want to check the value of a symbolic constant.  Because of this I set macro
expansion on.  This also makes the list files very big, so I usually have
the build system blow them away unless errors were encountered.  All in all,
macro expansion is an issue that comes up very rarely.

The biggest pain in the butt is that the debugger "step over" and "step
into" commands don't work for macros.  In fact, the debugger just refuses to
update the highlighted source line until it hits a plain instruction.  If
you try to step to a macro, it will keep cruising until the next non-macro
source line.  This is a real pain if you have lots of macros in a row.  I
deal with this by stepping in the program memory window instead of the
source code window.  It will follow along in the source code window within a
module, but won't switch between modules properly.  What a pain!  Doesn't
Microchip ever use this stuff themselves!?


********************************************************************
Olin Lathrop, embedded systems consultant in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, olin@embedinc.com, http://www.embedinc.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu