gnupic: gputils linker/assembler integration in higher level language
Subject:
Re: gputils linker/assembler integration in higher level language
From:
Craig Franklin ####@####.####
Date:
24 Sep 2004 06:37:02 +0100
Message-Id: <41536C24.6040705@users.sourceforge.net>
####@####.#### wrote:
>>>Do you also post to this list as "pico"? I don't want to get confused
>>>about who I am talking to.
>>>
>>>
>no
><snip>
>
>
>>These look like the HI-TECH directives.
>>
>>
>Yes, i have get the directives from hitech manual.
>
>
>>>Some of these are already implemented (GLOBAL)
>>>
>>>
>I know,
>
>
>>>and some are probably not necessary (FNROOT).
>>>
>>>
>I want it. The FNROOT is needed to differentiate between the main and
>interrupt function.
>
>
>
>>Are you suggesting this directive set because it is the best in your
>>opinion or because you are familiar with them?
>>
>>
>I'm not familiar with it. I use the freeware hitech c compiler picl,
>that's all.
>Basically, i need it all, with the exception of one.
>I can write the code for this directives, the big question is,
>how to pass these directives from assembler to the linker using
>object files and libraries.
>
>
My plan was to use the debug features of COFF. Debug symbols can be
added anywhere in the symbol table and they don't effect the operation
of the linker (unless they are linker directives). Auxiliary symbols
can be attached to symbols for more information. Storage classes and
types can be used to make the symbols more meaningful.
>In the object file, line numbers are part of the debug information right?
>
>
Yes.
>The second question is, how the scope of a variable can be encoded.
>Global and Local is not enought. Specifically i'm looking for a way
>to differentiate between file and local/global scoop without modify
>the variable name if possible.
>
>
>
I would attach an auxiliary symbol to it. You could also use the
storage class, but that would require linker changes.
