On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 7:25 AM, Holger Rapp <
HolgerRapp@...> wrote:
> I have never worked with relocatable code on PICs and I doubt it is very
> useful to have a macro assembler (as SPASM is) for that.
Yes and no. I can certainly say that I used plenty of macros and #defines in
my projects, but relocatable code does blur some lines between the linker
and preprocessor.
Still, many MPASM linkers are missing features such as dead code removal
(for unused functions) so that macros and such still have their place. And
besides, text substitutions are their own animal, and sometimes you can do
tricks with them you couldn't do in assembler logic.
I actually think relocatable code support would be the best feature to add
to SPASM next to make it's widely adopted.
David
