Search found 103 matches
- Thu Dec 26, 2019 11:49 am
- Forum: Astrobe for ARM Cortex-M0, M3, M4 and M7
- Topic: push {}
- Replies: 20
- Views: 80145
Re: push {}
The stack trace code I had described here does not work with leaf procedures. The procedure calling the leaf procedure is not detected as the leaf procedure does not create its own stack frame. I have yet been unable to come up with a solution as I fail to find a reliable method to detect a leaf pro...
- Sun Oct 27, 2019 1:02 am
- Forum: Astrobe for ARM Cortex-M0, M3, M4 and M7
- Topic: push {}
- Replies: 20
- Views: 80145
Re: push {}
In the screenshot, the disassembler does not show the Oberon source lines, while the current module-based disassembler does. Is this a functional limitation of the new disassembler, or a display option?
- Tue Oct 15, 2019 7:00 am
- Forum: Astrobe for ARM Cortex-M0, M3, M4 and M7
- Topic: push {}
- Replies: 20
- Views: 80145
Re: push {}
Oh, the disassembler looks nice and very, very useful. Do you have an ETA for the new Astrobe version? Question regarding the stack trace: so there's no way of getting the procedure names? Address and line number is useful, so I am not complaining, but also having the procedure name right in the out...
- Wed Jun 19, 2019 12:36 pm
- Forum: Astrobe for ARM Cortex-M0, M3, M4 and M7
- Topic: SYSTEM Extensions
- Replies: 1
- Views: 16644
SYSTEM Extensions
Astrobe's SYSTEM offers easy access to the PC, LNK, SP, and FP registers, both readable and writable, which is very -- very! -- useful to muck around with separate stacks for each process, exception handling (errors, faults), and other low level code of that nature. To separate the process stacks (t...
- Sun Jun 16, 2019 8:32 am
- Forum: Astrobe for ARM Cortex-M0, M3, M4 and M7
- Topic: String Literal Parameter
- Replies: 4
- Views: 24798
Re: String Literal Parameter
I agree, the parameter list for this procedure is on the edge, but still just acceptable. But defining a record type for just some config parameters is worth a thought, especially as I already factored out one parameter, assuming a default value (ptype := Essential), and providing an additional conf...
- Sat Jun 15, 2019 4:16 am
- Forum: Astrobe for ARM Cortex-M0, M3, M4 and M7
- Topic: String Literal Parameter
- Replies: 4
- Views: 24798
Re: String Literal Parameter
Indeed, using an open array is the work-around, combined with an ASSERT to check the length. The API just gets less expressive and "compile-time-checkable" this way: TYPE ProcessID* = ARRAY 4 OF CHAR; PROCEDURE Init*(p: Process; proc: Coroutines.PROC; stack: ARRAY OF BYTE; startAfter: INTEGER; perio...
- Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:54 am
- Forum: Astrobe for ARM Cortex-M0, M3, M4 and M7
- Topic: Syntax Colouring Limit?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 25606
Re: Syntax Colouring Limit?
Thanks. Renaming the file as advised does the trick.
- Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:21 pm
- Forum: Astrobe for ARM Cortex-M0, M3, M4 and M7
- Topic: String Literal Parameter
- Replies: 4
- Views: 24798
String Literal Parameter
I don't quite understand why I cannot pass a string literal in this case: MODULE M; TYPE Pid = ARRAY 4 OF CHAR; VAR id: Pid; id2: ARRAY 4 OF CHAR; PROCEDURE P(pid: Pid); END P; BEGIN P("id"); (* error *) id := "id"; P(id); (* ok *) id2 := "id"; P(id2) (* ok *) END M. Isn't "id" a string, which by it...
- Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:02 am
- Forum: Astrobe for ARM Cortex-M0, M3, M4 and M7
- Topic: Syntax Colouring Limit?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 25606
Re: Syntax Colouring Limit?
Thanks! However, I do not get this working OMM, ie. I still see the same colouring as before. I replaced the file and restarted Astrobe. Do I need to reset any preference setting? I still have the personal edition installed in addition to the professional one -- could this interfere?
- Mon Jun 10, 2019 12:20 pm
- Forum: Astrobe for ARM Cortex-M0, M3, M4 and M7
- Topic: Syntax Colouring Limit?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 25606
Syntax Colouring Limit?
Commenting out a block of code with nested comments, I seem to have run into a limitation of the syntax colouring related to comments, see screenshot. It's purely "cosmetic", as the compiler recognises the comments correctly.