MOVFW is a pseudo instruction defined by MPASM, not the actual architecture -- so that is documented actually. The only reason I do not like that is because it is too easy to read it as MOVWF by mistake. Tamas On 19 February 2012 13:55, PICdude wrote: > Some years ago I fat-fingered movwf as movfw instead and it compiled > w/o an error. Apparently it's the same as "movf ...,W" and was > leftover from an earlier time. Still works, but I don't use it as > it's undocumented so unsure when/if it'll be dropped. > > Cheers, > -Neil. > > > > Quoting Peter : > > > I found some balky jal generated pic code which was disassembled by > > 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 > contributors > > (Scott D.)? Vasile Surducan? > > > > I have the jal source for the above, this is not reverse engineering > > or anything > > like that. > > > > Any more easter eggs in pics we need to know about? Google knows > > 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 > > > > > > -- > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > --=20 int main() { char *a,*s,*q; printf(s=3D"int main() { char *a,*s,*q; printf(s=3D%s%s%s, q=3D%s%s%s%s,s,q,q,a=3D%s%s%s%s,q,q,q,a,a,q); }", q=3D"\"",s,q,q,a=3D"\\",q,q,q,a,a,q); } --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .