A simple and basic question

[skimask]

skimask, happy birthday.
I created a new code:
..........
There was no lst created but a mac, asm and hex.
.....
How do you filter out the information needed?

There's a checkbox in MCS for telling MCS to kick out a .lst file during the compilation.
Put easily recognizable labels before and after the code section that your after in your PBP source and when the .lst file gets created, do a search (Ctrl-F) for those labels and you should be able to see them right off.

[Ted's]

This is what is written in between

   48						LABEL?L	L00001	
     +					        LALL
     +	0019-				L00001
    49						CMPGE?WCL	_Zahl, 0EA60h, L00002
     +	0019- 0838			        movf    _Zahl, W
     +	001A- 00A0			        movwf   R0
     +	001B- 0839			        movf    (_Zahl) + 1, W
     +	001C- 00A1			        movwf   (R0) + 1
     +	001D- 30EA			        movlw   low ((0EA60h) >> 8)
     +	001E- 00A3			        movwf   R1 + 1
     +	001F- 3060			        movlw   low (low (0EA60h))
     +	0020- 2001			        call    CMPGE
     +	0021- 1D03			        btfss   STATUS, Z
     +	0022- 2827			        goto    L00002
    50						ADD?WCW	_Zahl, 001h, _Zahl
     +	0023- 0AB8			        incf    _Zahl, F
     +	0024- 1903			        btfsc   STATUS, Z
     +	0025- 0AB9			        incf    _Zahl + 1, F
    51						GOTO?L	L00001
     +	0026- 2819			        goto    L00001
    52						LABEL?L	L00002	
     +					        LALL
     +	0027-				L00002
    53

What is more, there is no question about my configuration. It is a timing issue. The osc value determines the speed to let the program know how many cycles one millisecond will take f.i.. Knowing the speed there is enough information to reproduce the question and to give an answer. I am not here to relearn what would take others just a few seconds to reproduce - less than writing a "do it yourself" takes.

I am going to use Jackson's 3us and this is the end of the story.

Do not make things more complicated than they have to be.

[Acetronics2]

Your result is :

504.027000 ms ... @ 8.4 µs per loop !!!

3 minutes to get it with MPSIM , as we had explained you ...

Alain

[Ted's]

You see, simple and easy for an experienced programmer.

Why did you not just do that in the first place?

So my code will be:

Zahl VAR WORD
time_in_us VAR WORD
DEFINE OSC 20
WHILE Zahl < 60000
    Zahl = Zahl + 1
WEND

time_in_us = Zahl * (84/10)

[Ted's]

One thing to clarify: Is there a difference regarding the time being elapsed when using BYTE for Zahl instead of WORD?

So

Zahl VAR WORD

is being replaced by

Zahl VAR BYTE

[skimask]

One thing to clarify: Is there a difference regarding the time being elapsed when using BYTE for Zahl instead of WORD?

Yes, because comparing 2 words could take 2 comparisons....Check the high byte, if it's equal, then you have to go on and check the low byte.

[Acetronics2]

You see, simple and easy for an experienced programmer.

Why did you not just do that in the first place?

1) Cause here, we teach people how to catch the fish ... it's not a PbP "Drive in" !!!

as we had explained you ...

2) Cause there was NO answer to what you had asked ... and no way to understand what you wanted to do ...

3) Still no way to understand ... :

Zahl VAR WORD
time_in_us VAR WORD
DEFINE OSC 20
WHILE Zahl < 60000
    Zahl = Zahl + 1
WEND

time_in_us = Zahl * (84/10)

... with this code, "Time_in_us" WON' T be 504 027 ... so, why re-calculate it ???

... I do not joke : with the calculation errors ( roundings ) , the showed result will be ... FALSE !!!


Was I Spiritual enough ???

Alain