View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
sapiens
Joined: 27 Sep 2007 Posts: 4
|
Using calls instead of jumps in function call |
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:59 am |
|
|
Is there a way to disable compiler to generate jumps instead of calls? It messes up the disassembly reading. |
|
|
ckielstra
Joined: 18 Mar 2004 Posts: 3680 Location: The Netherlands
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:09 am |
|
|
Most people want the compiler to generate efficient code and don't care if this makes the disassembly more difficult to read. If you want to sacrifce speed and memory usage for an easier to read disassembly than you will have to change the default settings:
- Set the optimizer to it's lowest level
- Declare all functions as #seperate |
|
|
sapiens
Joined: 27 Sep 2007 Posts: 4
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 4:52 am |
|
|
Thank you.
It would be good experience if CCS has a flag to turn on/off jump generation.. For instance, in optimization pane, a check box, instead of a slider that means nothing. |
|
|
ckielstra
Joined: 18 Mar 2004 Posts: 3680 Location: The Netherlands
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:20 am |
|
|
sapiens wrote: | It would be good experience if CCS has a flag to turn on/off jump generation.. For instance, in optimization pane, a check box, instead of a slider that means nothing. | A good suggestion, send this as a request to [email protected]. Without user's input the developers at CCS don't know how to improve the compiler. I've found CCS to be very responsive, several of my requests have been implemented. |
|
|
Jay Miller Guest
|
messd up listings |
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 6:14 am |
|
|
If you want to see them in numerical order,as coded in the chip, just go to DOS, use the SORT program and save (>) to a new file.
I've done this for years(uh,time flies) just to see what's going on.
Obviouly, newer 'sorting' methods are available, I just use what works for me.
Jay |
|
|
|