gnupic: Re: [gnupic] Warning [220] : Address exceeds maximum range for this processor
Subject:
Re: [gnupic] Warning [220] : Address exceeds maximum range for this
processor
From:
"Nestor A. Marchesini" ####@####.####
Date:
7 Nov 2007 02:58:56 +0000
Message-Id: <47312B59.7040704@xinet.com.ar>
El 06/11/07 23:06, David escribió:
> On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 21:28:54 -0300
> "Nestor A. Marchesini" ####@####.#### wrote:
>
>> Again with the 18f4550, this time trying to define data in memory
>> eeprom data.
>> In my opinion gpasm should not generate this warning:
>>
>> gpasm-0.13.4 beta prog1.asm 11-6-2007
>> 21:05:20 PAGE 75
>> F00000 04012 ORG H'F00000'
>> Warning [220] : Address exceeds maximum range for this processor.
> You're correct. This issue was actually reported by Thomas Welsch right
> after the release of 0.13.5. We added bounds checking to gpasm
> (formerly it wasn't available in absolute mode) and completely forgot
> about EEPROM data regions. If you'd like, you can see the earlier
> discussion starting 27 Oct 2007 with the subject line:
> "[gnupic] org H'2100', EEPROM and "Warnung:Address exceeds maximum range for this processor."
>
> It seemed like a really tough problem, but I just realized that gplink
> has been handling this situation just fine for relocatable code, and I
> might be able to come up with a good solution by looking at what
> information it uses.
>
> Even though it doesn't keep gpasm from functioning properly, I know it's
> an irritating issue and I'll try to get it patched up quickly. Thanks
> everyone for being patient (or at least everyone who still uses
> absolute mode).
>
> David Barnett
Ok...time to time, only that he was informing those warnings in obsolute
mode. :-)
I remedied with:
ERRORLEVEL 0, -220
Only for large projects use gplink...but if it is true, gplink gives better
file listing much more informative.
Regards
Néstor A. Marchesini
Chajari-Entre Rios-Argentina
