assembly in future C standard HCF Gerry Wheeler

c

    Sponsored Links

    Next

  • 1. How to simulate keyboard.../dev/tty0?
    Hi all, I'm trying to send chars to the current console (currently having cursor focus) - /dev/tty0 - in my program by: char st = 'K', ri = 'L', ng = 'J' int tty; tty = open(">/dev/tty0", O_WRONLY); ioctl(tty, TIOCSTI, &st); ioctl(tty, TIOCSTI, &ri); ioctl(tty, TIOCSTI, &ng); I'm using redhat 9, kde. Everything is ok in the linux console (on tty1 chars are sending properly - KLJ...), but in kde i see strange things (and not only for those characters): ^[[D- on ttyp1 - on mozilla window My question is why chars are not properly sending by ioctl call, is there any additional settings to do (setting termios, keyboard driver?)?? thanks, Keeper
  • 2. How to simulate keyboard.../dev/tty0 ?
    Hi all, I'm trying to send chars to the current console (currently having cursor focus) - /dev/tty0 - in my program by: char st='K',ri='L',ng='J'; int tty; tty = open(">/dev/tty0", O_WRONLY); ioctl(tty, TIOCSTI, &st); ioctl(tty, TIOCSTI, &ri); ioctl(tty, TIOCSTI, &ng); I'm using RedHat 9, kde. Everything is ok in the linux console (on tty1 chars are sending properly - KLJ...), but in kde i see strange things (and not only for those characters): ^[[D- on ttyp1 - on mozilla window My question is: why chars are not properly sendt by ioctl call, is there any additional settings to do (setting termios, keyboard driver?)?? thanks, Keeper
  • 3. File size > 4 GB
    Hi, How to get a file size > 4GB on Windows 2000 (NTFS)? for example: struct ffblk blk; if(findfirst(filename,&blk,0)!=0) return(-1); return(blk.ff_fsize); ... won't work as it return a long. but an unsigned long with 32 bits can only store 4,294,967,295. So what method can I use to get the file size ? Mickael.
  • 4. _wcsicmp api
    Hi, I am working on porting from windows to unix. i want to know whether the _wcsicmp is available in unix platform also. if there is an equivalent to it that will also be ok, i can write a macro and use it. tia shekar
  • 5. How to avoid the error "Arg list too long" on IBM ?
    Hi all, I got the error message "Arg list too long" when linking a lot of object files. Does anyone know how to resolve this problem ? Thanks for help, Sakun

Re: assembly in future C standard HCF Gerry Wheeler

Postby Walter Banks » Sat, 04 Nov 2006 22:35:39 GMT

As this thread wanders off topic this industry was introduced to a new
mnemonic in Byte article about decoding the undocumented
Motorola 6800 instructions. The HCF (Halt Catch Fire) opcode $DD
or $D9. HFC locked up the processor and cycled the address bus
The author of that article was Gerry Wheeler.

Gerry Wheeler, 54, died October 15, 2006, advanced non-Hodgkins
lymphoma cancer. Gerry made significant contributions to the technology
of the embedded systems world and was a key part of the development
of many household name products.

Programmer, Ham KG4NBB, author, father, husband, active commuity
participant Gerry will be missed by all.

w..


Similar Threads:

1.assembly in future C standard

Peter Nilsson < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote:

(Crossposted to comp.std.c, with followups directed there, hopefully
 appropriately.  The original post discussed the possibility of whether
 __asm or something similar to it would be added to the C standard.)

> Contrary to Richard Heathfield's categorical statement, it is not an
> absolute given that there will never be an asm keyword in C. But it
> is unlikely because it's already clear that the asm keyword in C++ has
> not served to truly standardise the syntax of inline assembly.

One idea that was not mentioned in the original thread (I imagine for
good reason, because it's a half-baked and probably stupid idea that
occurred to me reading your post) would be to allow for some kind of
conditional assembly, just perhaps something like

#pragma assemble
#pragma X86 /* Inner pragma's implementation-defined */
  /* Inline assembly, which the implementation can ignore or not */
#pragma no-assemble
  /* Stock C code for implementations that can't or won't accept the
   * assemble pragma: */
  for( i=1; i < 10; i++ ) {
    foo();
    /* ... */
  }
#pragma end-assemble

The end result would be something like "If the implementation attempts
to inline the assembly code contained within a #pragma assemble
directive, the behavior is implementation-defined.  Otherwise the
assembly code shall be ignored and the C code contained within any
corresponding #pragma no-assemble directive shall be compiled as
though no directives were present."  It would require adding some
duties to the #pragma directive, but it would allow implementors to
take a reasonable shot at using targetted assembly instructions when
appropriate and available, and reverting to ordinary C otherwise.

I'm sure there are reasons why this is stupid and/or impossible, or it
would have been done already :-)

> At the end of the day, the committee could probably spend many man
> weeks deciding issues on an __asm keyword, but for what? Most
> implementations will keep their existing syntax, and most programmers
> who use inline assembly will no doubt continue to prefer the localised
> syntax because it's less cumbersome than any standard syntax.

Indeed, but it's an interesting thought experiment to consider how the
committee *might* add assembly to C if they chose to do so.  (Well,
interesting to me, at least.)

-- 
C. Benson Manica           | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
cbmanica(at)gmail.com      | don't, I need to know.  Flames welcome.



Return to c

 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guest