>     Presumably, the motor-control PICs don't REALLY have less flash
>     memory; they're just regular 18Fs with 4K of the flash
>     pre-programmed by Microchip instead of by your user.  Perhaps
>     there's a signature in the flash that you can use to identify
>     the device.

No. As far as I can make out from the datasheet they realy have less
FLASH, the remaining is ROM.

>     Give that guy a break... The 12-bit parts were designed in the
>     late 1970s, when transistors were expensive.  Besides, it's
>     trivially easy, in most cases, to overcome the restrictions on
>     CALL destination addresses in the 12-bit parts.

It is just the place of that one fixed bit I was complaining about. IMHO
it should be either the LSB or the MSB, not somewhere inbetween.

And how do you overcome that limitation easily, without using call
vesctors or re-arraging your code? Note that I am looking at it from the
compiler writers perspective.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads