We are running a survey to help us improve the experience for all of our members. If you see the survey appear, please take the time to tell us about your experience if you can.
The C166 compiler generates incorrect code when using __inline functions with bit return type. Test source code:
bit bitvar1 = 1; bit bitvar2; __inline bit test() { return bitvar1; } void main() { bitvar2 = test(); }
9: void main() 10: { 0000000A 4A00F000 BMOV R0.0,0xFD00.0 11: bitvar2 = test(); 0000000E 4AF00001 BMOV 0xFD00.1,R0.0 12: } 00000012 CB00 RET
; line 4: __inline bit test() ; line 5: { ; line 6: return bitvar1; BMOV R4.0,bitvar1 ; line 7: } RET ; line 8: ; line 9: void main() ; line 10: { ; line 11: bitvar2 = test(); CALL test BMOV bitvar2,R4.0 ; line 12: } RET
Hi, Stefan, thanks for find this bug No problem. But does it mean that I don't have to report this bug to Keil anymore? I mean, with your interest in the bug, it sounds like you work for Keil. If not, how do I report a bug? Do I write an email to support.intl@keil.com? There is a couple more bugs I found some time ago. One of them was in the implementation of scanf and the other was in RTX166 tiny. So while I am at it, I could as well verify that the bugs are still there and report them too. - mike