CCS C Software and Maintenance Offers
FAQFAQ   FAQForum Help   FAQOfficial CCS Support   SearchSearch  RegisterRegister 

ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

CCS does not monitor this forum on a regular basis.

Please do not post bug reports on this forum. Send them to support@ccsinfo.com

CCS 3.236 update- LST File

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CCS Forum Index -> General CCS C Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
d00dajo



Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Posts: 34

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

CCS 3.236 update- LST File
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 3:39 am     Reply with quote

I just updated to version 3.236 from 3.214. Of course there are always little "surprises" with every update but this time it was a shock.

The C-crossreferens information in the LST file is GONE! Only the assembly is showing. Now, I most certainly DONT want this "new improved" format, I want my C-code back for simple crossrefence. Does anyone know if there is a switch for turning the insertion of C back on?


//Daniel.
prwatCCS



Joined: 10 Dec 2003
Posts: 67
Location: West Sussex, UK

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 4:04 am     Reply with quote

I also use v3.236 but dont have your problem (as I understand it).

Check on where the #LIST and #NOLIST directives are in the various source/header files. Somewhere you probably have a #nolist before the compiler gets to the place you are interested in.

An extract from one of my listing files shows it does still work !

Code:
CCS PCH C Compiler, Version 3.236, 27303               27-Oct-05 15:41
.....
3DF4:  MOVLW  0A
3DF6:  MOVWF  x3C
....................        break;
3DF8:  BRA    3E14
....................
....................     case NRC_SENSOR_NONE:
....................        UartBuff.MsgHdr.ParameterData[ 0 ] = NR_SENSOR_NONE >> 8;
3DFA:  MOVLB  1
3DFC:  CLRF   x3B
....................        UartBuff.MsgHdr.ParameterData[ 1 ] = NR_SENSOR_NONE;
3DFE:  MOVLW  04
3E00:  MOVWF  x3C
....................        break;
3E02:  BRA    3E14

....


regards
_________________
Peter Willis
Development Director
Howard Eaton Lighting Ltd UK
d00dajo



Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Posts: 34

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 4:17 am     Reply with quote

prwatCCS wrote:
I also use v3.236 but dont have your problem (as I understand it).

Check on where the #LIST and #NOLIST directives are in the various source/header files. Somewhere you probably have a #nolist before the compiler gets to the place you are interested in.

An extract from one of my listing files shows it does still work !

Code:
CCS PCH C Compiler, Version 3.236, 27303               27-Oct-05 15:41
.....
3DF4:  MOVLW  0A
3DF6:  MOVWF  x3C
....................        break;
3DF8:  BRA    3E14
....................
....................     case NRC_SENSOR_NONE:
....................        UartBuff.MsgHdr.ParameterData[ 0 ] = NR_SENSOR_NONE >> 8;
3DFA:  MOVLB  1
3DFC:  CLRF   x3B
....................        UartBuff.MsgHdr.ParameterData[ 1 ] = NR_SENSOR_NONE;
3DFE:  MOVLW  04
3E00:  MOVWF  x3C
....................        break;
3E02:  BRA    3E14

....


regards


Strange. No , I dont have any #NOLIST in the code.
However, I am using the CCS PCM C Compiler (16F).
Perhaps this is PCM related.
Ttelmah
Guest







PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 4:39 am     Reply with quote

NoList, is present in every one of the processor include files. It may be that the ones you were using had this already removed.

Best Wishes
d00dajo



Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Posts: 34

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 5:22 am     Reply with quote

Ttelmah wrote:
NoList, is present in every one of the processor include files. It may be that the ones you were using had this already removed.

Best Wishes


Yes,

What I meant was : The last pragma for listing is #list in the code.
Exactly the same files with #list, #nolist as before.

Also, I notice that header files that DONT have the #nolist (because I want the definitions to show in the lst) does print the #define X Y rows, but the actual #include "" line is missing in the lst file. (However files with #nolist, #list) shows the includeline (but obviously not the #define rows)

So, I _really_ dont think it is #list related.
All the comments and function names are also missing.
d00dajo



Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Posts: 34

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Solved.
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 5:35 am     Reply with quote

d00dajo wrote:
Ttelmah wrote:
NoList, is present in every one of the processor include files. It may be that the ones you were using had this already removed.

Best Wishes


Yes,

What I meant was : The last pragma for listing is #list in the code.
Exactly the same files with #list, #nolist as before.

Also, I notice that header files that DONT have the #nolist (because I want the definitions to show in the lst) does print the #define X Y rows, but the actual #include "" line is missing in the lst file. (However files with #nolist, #list) shows the includeline (but obviously not the #define rows)

So, I _really_ dont think it is #list related.
All the comments and function names are also missing.


I have changed my mind ;-)

Actually, it IS #list related.
For some obscure reason, after including a LARGE h-fil with lots of #ORG #inline etc, The compiler stopped printing the c-comments and declarations. I added a #list at the end of the file (there was NOT an #nolist in it) the printouts started working. Adding the #list after the #include statment in the main file, the problem persists. But, nevertheless now it works.

Thanks for your assistance guys!

//Daniel.
Ttelmah
Guest







PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 5:58 am     Reply with quote

I'd suspect the difference, is probably in the 'standard' assumed from the command line. It seems to give the standard results for me, from PCW. I'd suggest trying each of the format options (+LY etc.), and see if one makes it work.

Best Wishes
d00dajo



Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Posts: 34

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 6:01 am     Reply with quote

Ttelmah wrote:
I'd suspect the difference, is probably in the 'standard' assumed from the command line. It seems to give the standard results for me, from PCW. I'd suggest trying each of the format options (+LY etc.), and see if one makes it work.

Best Wishes


I have tested that, same result.

But something is very very fishy, the comments (//remark)
are gone aswell after a certain point in the file. I can no longer get the output at all...... Im starting to wonder if I checked the wrong file when I got it working (the old one), since I cannot recreate it.

I will investigate just what it is I am doing wrong, but since 4 of my old projects ALL give the same phenomenon, it shouldnt be too hard to track
d00dajo



Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Posts: 34

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Really resolved
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 6:14 am     Reply with quote

Hi guys,
Finally I found my trouble.
One of the include files high up in the code had a
#list on the last row. There wasn't a linebreak after it. I added one and now it works as it should.
Apperently the latest compiler version requires linebreak after #list.
(And all 4 projects shared that file)

//DJ
d00dajo



Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Posts: 34

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Re: Really resolved
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 6:27 am     Reply with quote

d00dajo wrote:
Hi guys,
Finally I found my trouble.
One of the include files high up in the code had a
#list on the last row. There wasn't a linebreak after it. I added one and now it works as it should.
Apperently the latest compiler version requires linebreak after #list.
(And all 4 projects shared that file)

//DJ


Addition:
ANY FILE that doesnt have a linebreak or at least some sign after the last statement will crash the list output.
dyeatman



Joined: 06 Sep 2003
Posts: 1924
Location: Norman, OK

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 8:10 am     Reply with quote

For me that makes sense because the next line would be appended to the end of the #list line without a break at the end making the whole line invalid.

Keep in mind the file is <included> onto the end of the previous file wherever it ends. In this case on the same line after the #list command.
d00dajo



Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Posts: 34

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 8:25 am     Reply with quote

dyeatman wrote:
For me that makes sense because the next line would be appended to the end of the #list line without a break at the end making the whole line invalid.

Keep in mind the file is <included> onto the end of the previous file wherever it ends. In this case on the same line after the #list command.


Yes it makes sense - BUT, it has never been this way in the earlier versions of the compiler. So, some headache for old projects that have always worked.
dyeatman



Joined: 06 Sep 2003
Posts: 1924
Location: Norman, OK

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 8:31 am     Reply with quote

Waaaaay back I remember running into this problem where I also neglected to add the CR at the end of an included file so PCM did have this problem at sometime in the past (I think it was actually all the way back in Version 2 where I learned the lesson!) What a hard way to learn, but then again it did make me remember it!

I use a syntax checker program I wrote that checks for and fixes the problem automatically so I haven't had to think about it in quite a while...
ckielstra



Joined: 18 Mar 2004
Posts: 3680
Location: The Netherlands

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 8:49 am     Reply with quote

Has this been reported to CCS? Now the cause is found it should be very easy for them to fix it.
d00dajo - home
Guest







CCS
PostPosted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 12:56 pm     Reply with quote

ckielstra wrote:
Has this been reported to CCS? Now the cause is found it should be very easy for them to fix it.


Yes,
CCS Support have been made aware of this "feature".

(However, since the last update includes some "fixes" for the LST generation to support the upcoming linker, this might actually not be something that will be "fixed".)
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CCS Forum Index -> General CCS C Discussion All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group