... This is easiest to do in assembly. http://hc11-ide.funkmunch.net/newbrain/kernel/k_lcd.s for one example. You can also use the linker to do it, specifying

... Certainly that's one approach. To make work correctly, it would need much more work, including making signal() actually able to attach a routine

Hello, I've been using the compiler for about 3 years, and I've run into something I'm not sure how to handle. I am using the HC12D60. I'd like to write a C

... Good thing we are developers. The idea then is that we fix it so that it can be C99 compliant, and send the "fix" (in whatever form) back to Stephane

... Hmm. Then this is not a conforming implementation in some ways. IOW, it is not C, but rather some other language which *looks* a lot like C. [#6] The two

... Strangely, the following symbols were not defined when I included test.c:274: error: `SIG_ATOMIC_MIN' undeclared (first use in this function)

Mike McCarty wrote: [snip] ... AAAAKKK! Of course, I meant "this code is not uninterruptible". But you knew that. [snip] Mike --

... Exactly. Sorry I didn't make that clear. The output code does not guarantee atomic access. It either needs to use a byte sized integer, or disable

... I suppose you mean the compiler output and not my example source. ... Thank you for adding your explanations to the quote from the standard. It makes more

... Mike, I beleive that you don't see it, but when you know someone is actively programming in C and you tell them to "learn the language" in this context,

... This code violates the Standard, and is incorrect, no question. I quote the Standard... 7.14 Signal handling [#1] The header

... [snip] ... I don't see where what I wrote is rude. If I called you stupid, or something like that, then yes. What I gave you is my best advice. Learn C. If

... Well, here is my proof that either way, the compiler is wrong, and Mike agrees (unless of course he contradicts himself). /* JEFFS exper */ #include

... wrote: ... Correction: typedef unsigned int word; so it is an int, but also 'unsigned'

... In a way perhaps you are right as it would only be for certain architectures. But I doubt you have any reason why not to make it work in this compiler

... It looks like a source error to me, not a compiler error. ... This looks correct. You have unreasonable expectations. ... A permanent fix would be to learn

This looks like a compiler problem. I need to write a 16-bit value to the EEPROM array to latch the address, but the compiler automatically turns it into two