Scott said: > The other short-sighted mistake was the address bit thrown away for > relative branches and relative calls. What do you mean about a wasted bit? RCALL encoding: 1101 1nnn nnnn nnnn Target is PC + 2 + 2n Same thing happens with BRA and conditional branches. Scott said: > At one point, I thought that 3 sets of FSR/INDF's was inadequate (why not > 4?). It turns out though, I found it convenient to use 2 sets for the > non-interrupt code and the last set for interrupts. What do you use for a stack pointer? Bob Ammerman RAm Systems -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu