Problem with v3.186 ?

[franckcl]

Hello,
I have compiled my program with the last version 3.186 and it does not run fine (I have nothing in my LCD display then I can suppose there is a problem with the string array...)

If I compile it with the 3.185, I don't have any problems.
I have no time to search where is the problem.

I am using PIC18F6720

Who have check this last version ??

thank you
Franck

[mpfj]

Some of the bugs fixed in 3v186 are to do with tables.

I reported a couple of string / table 3v185 bugs, one of which they didn't fix at all, and the other still doesn't work properly.

Are you using constant strings ?

The easiest thing for you to do is to compile under 3v185 and 3v186 (without changing the source code !!) and find the differences.

You can then post the bits that have changed and someone might be able to help ...

Mark

[franckcl]

Yes I am using constant of strings to display messages on the LCD.

const char C_STR[]={
"Aucun archivage !_" "Log is empty !_"\
" (+) (-) (suite)_" " (+) (-) (next)_"\
etc...

If I have time, I will compare the disassembly listing I will post the change, but for the moment, I use 3.185

Franck

[schmobol]

Hi Franckcl,

Although I'm French as well, I'll write in english for the rest of the forum. I have the same problem than you. One of my software task is to drive a LCD display. I have a huge amount of Const data stored in Flash (it implies table reads greater than 256 bytes). My software runs with v 3.185 but not with 3.186 but this time I don't have time to track down the problem.

I have heard, in this forum, about an other table read bug in v3.186. It might be related.

I'll try v3.187 ASAP, but in the meantime I'll keep on compiling with v3.185

[regan]

Your code might be suffering from the same thing that mine is.

I've posted a bug report with CSS rearding a relative addressing error in 3.186.

In some places the instructions BC (Branch if Carry) and BNC (Branch if No Carry) have been used to replace two instructions that test the Carry flag before executing an absolute GOTO. In theory, this should be fine, but if the relative address crosses a 1K boundary, the compiler miscalculates the address. You can verify this by looking through your LST file and checking for BC or BNC instructions.

hope this helps,

Regan.

[wedilo]

Hello folks,
Arrrrrrgggh I can't believe it. I delete the instal version of v3.185 by mistake.
Is there someone who know how I can download older versions on CCS website?

Thanks for any help

73 Sven

[agrj]

Hi,

I have it here. send me your e-mail and I send you the file.

Dinho