gnupic: mcp2510.inc in gpasm headers?
Subject:
Re: mcp2510.inc in gpasm headers?
From:
Brandon Fosdick ####@####.####
Date:
3 Nov 2001 21:42:49 -0000
Message-Id: <3BE464D6.AADF1915@glue.umd.edu>
Craig Franklin wrote:
> This device is not an MCU. It is a CAN controller. This device is
> controlled by an SPI port. You are using a PIC to provide the SPI
> port. You would like an include file that contains the commands to this
> controller. MPLAB does not include a header file for this device.
>
> Correct?
I don't know if MPLAB has the header, I don't use MPLAB and its been
some time since I looked at it. But you are correct, it isn't an MCU.
> I see a mcp2510.inc in the zip located at:
> Is this the one you are referring to?
Actually, no. Try this one (AN212), its already assembler friendly:
http://www.microchip.com/1000/suppdoc/appnote/category/analog/can/808/index.htm
> 3. The new header would be used in conjunction with the other processor
> header files. There can't be any duplicate definitions. To ensure no
> problems, the new header would have to be checked against all of the
> other headers.
I've been manually placing this header in ${PREFIX}/share/gpasm/header
since version 0.9.11 and haven't had any problems with it yet. OTOH,
I've only used it in conjunction with a 16F877.
> Adding a file like this is something new. Currently, all of the header
> files distributed with gpasm are for processor specific information.
> Before adding the file, I would need some time to consider other
> consequences.
>
> These extra include files could be distributed seperately. We would
> still have to test for gpasm compatibility, but that is easily
> automated.
I hadn't thought about putting it in a seperate "extras" package, but it
sounds like a reasonable idea.
