Talk:ISRs PIC And Multitasking: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Content added Content deleted
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
In my opinion, this is easier to begin with. It was very useful for me and allowed me to develop faster. But yes, it should be substituted by assembler interrupt handlers, mainly for efficiency so that not so many function calls are made (ISR->dispatcher->handler). [[User:Unsigned|Unsigned]] 03:53, 9 May 2015 (CDT) |
In my opinion, this is easier to begin with. It was very useful for me and allowed me to develop faster. But yes, it should be substituted by assembler interrupt handlers, mainly for efficiency so that not so many function calls are made (ISR->dispatcher->handler). [[User:Unsigned|Unsigned]] 03:53, 9 May 2015 (CDT) |
||
I should point out that multiple asm statements even when volatile are not guaranteed to appear in the same order by GCC even if they appear in succession. |
|||
Revision as of 03:19, 21 February 2018
IRQs in C
Why make this overly complicated hack when using assembly remains both shorter and simpler?
In my opinion, this is easier to begin with. It was very useful for me and allowed me to develop faster. But yes, it should be substituted by assembler interrupt handlers, mainly for efficiency so that not so many function calls are made (ISR->dispatcher->handler). Unsigned 03:53, 9 May 2015 (CDT)
I should point out that multiple asm statements even when volatile are not guaranteed to appear in the same order by GCC even if they appear in succession.