I don't know the answer, though I offer an observation.
Most compilers will optimize away the delay that you are trying to
implement. Therefore you should declare timeout this way:
volatile int timeout;
Also, when I do it that way, I don't get the warning.
-Ken Jackson
Mary-Ann Johnson writ
Hi,
A user sent me these patches to add pic18f2523 support.
Can you include them?
Tijl (FreeBSD package maintainer)
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: sdcc+gputils patch for pic18f2523
Date: Monday 21 January 2008
From: Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTE
If I compile the following code (SDCC 2.7.0):
void func(void)
{
int timeout;
return;
timeout = 0x;
while (timeout--);
}
SDCC produces the following warnings:
"src/test.c:8: warning 84:
Hello,
gputils have added support for a variety of new devices, includeing
pic16f886 and 887, I suggest making a couple small changes to the
source:
1) sdcc/device/include/pic/pic16f88[6|7].h:
add RA6 and RA7 to PORTA, thus
// - PORTA bits
typedef union {
struct
