Some years ago I fat-fingered movwf as movfw instead and it compiled =20
w/o an error.  Apparently it's the same as "movf ...,W" and was =20
leftover from an earlier time.  Still works, but I don't use it as =20
it's undocumented so unsure when/if it'll be dropped.

Cheers,
-Neil.



Quoting Peter <plpeter2006@yahoo.com>:

> I found some balky jal generated pic code which was disassembled by =20
> me to yield
> the use of what appears to be an undocumented instruction, used as in:
>
>   0821  movf     0x21, w ; load w with data from reg. 0x21
>   0065  tris     0x65    ; undocumented instruction
>
> Target is pic16f628 (non A), disassembler is gpdasm.
>
> Can someone shed some light on this? Jal author (Wouter), gpdasm contribu=
tors
> (Scott D.)? Vasile Surducan?
>
> I have the jal source for the above, this is not reverse engineering =20
> or anything
> like that.
>
> Any more easter eggs in pics we need to know about? Google knows =20
> next to nothing
> about it, and I suspect any entries might have been censed.
>
> thanks,
>
> -- Peter
>
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>



--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.