From: "Frank Bemelman"
References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: To C or not to C
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 18:32:58 +0100
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
Organization: EuroNet Internet
NNTP-Posting-Date: 05 Jan 2003 17:34:11 GMT
"Wouter van Ooijen (www.voti.nl)" schreef in bericht
> >The pause was appreciated. I was thinking about a list of 'C'
> >things that aren't available in ASM.
> Technically that list has to be empty, because in the end the C code
> has to be realised using asm...
> Practically speaking some HLL features can be very difficult,
> error-prone and/or time consuming to implement in asm. For instance: a
> PIC (12 or 14 bit) has no stack pointer that can be used for data
> addressing, hence fixed data addresses are used. A compiler can easily
> overlap the data, so the total data memory usage will be the same as
> when a stack were available. This can of course be done in asm, but it
> is very time consuming to re-calculate the variable-to-memory mapping
> whenever the calling tree has changed.
Yes, I thought I'd could think of something, like typedefs, structures,
unions of course, things that ASM (in general) does not support at the same
comfortable level as with C. Do we have something like sizeof with ASM?
I know you can live (program) without these features, but I would not
want to miss them.
(remove 'x' & .invalid when sending email)