no tasks?

If only one task at a time runs, you are wrong.

Tasks are for (semi)concurrent execution. So no tasks are needed if only one runs at a time...

If only one task at a time runs, you are wrong.

Tasks are for (semi)concurrent execution. So no tasks are needed if only one runs at a time...

i give you lesson. yu dont know that the c51 only can execute one instruction at a time. it can only execute one task at a time. only one task can run at a time. it is a very complex program and needs a lot of tasks. i think you have never written a big complex program like mine. when i finish the code i will put it on google and you can learn.

it is a very complex program and needs a lot of tasks

Why is that necessary? Come on, tell us. We want to learn.

The following code have an even larger complexity - 1947 "tasks". But since only one can run at a time, each task has become a function to call. So zero task support needed. No extra task stacks needed. Just 1947 functions for the specific "tasks" to perform.

Now how is that for complexity?

int main() {
    initialize();
    for (;;) {
        switch (find_out_what_to_to()) {
            case TASK_1:  do_task_1(); break;
            case TASK_2:  do_task_2(); break;
            ...
            case TASK_1947: do_task_1947(); break;
            default:
                oops_repair();
        }
    }
}

The days are ticking - when can we expect this master-class lecture on the writing of advanced, complicated, applications using 223 threads but with only one thread "runnable" (as separate from "running") at any one time?

Can we also expect a nice diagram showing the timing and sequence interaction between the 223 threads, so we can be awed at the exquisite handover mechanisms and state machine designs used to get the data pumping around in the system in a deterministic way?

so you should be careful. you show you are very fast to mock and even faster to judge. and you still mislead with things i not say.
i am busy. you waste my time with nonsense. be patient and open your mind.

So have you spent some time considering my posted code about a state machine calling functions depending on what current task to do? Zero impact on the stack, and produces excellent code for the 8051 processor.

Remember that a concept with threads means that all 223 threads are execution root objects, making it impossible for the compiler to find how to overlay variables.

But what do I know. A state machine must be nonsense since so many people are using them.

so i did waste some time with your suggestions. but it is obviously no good for my project. i said first it is very conplicated. you probably cannot understand.

dont waste any more of my time to answering the distractions. i see you want to show you are better. but wait.

Go, go away. Please. __SNIFF__

Yes, I'll eagerly wait for the 223 code-compressed threads to run in the marvelous 8051 processor some companies uses as keyboard or mouse controller.

you better use the acme ACM8051 which comes in a rubber case.

Erik

PS what Raisonance cals "code compressor" Keil calls "optimize"

but it is obviously no good for my project

There's absolutely nothing obvious about that. That's because a) you haven't told us nearly enough about the actual project for anyone to know what could possibly be obvious about it, and b) your assessment of your own work is most probably wrong.

i said first it is very conplicated. you probably cannot understand.

Or maybe we simply refuse to believe you, because there's no particular reason we should. There are two reasonably likely possiblities at this point: either

1) you really don't know what you're talking about, or

2) a '51 is entirely the wrong choice of platform for your project

dont waste any more of my time to answering the distractions.

The only person who can waste any of your time is you. And given you insisted you were so terribly busy, you're certainly doing an awful lot of that.

so it is obvious to me. and it is me who is doing this work not you. all everyone said here was a waste of my precious or valuable time. and so your asessment is obviously wrong. the 3rd posibility is i a right and you dont understand. you didnt even think of that did you! you think you know so much about my project. how? you hack my computer? i did not tell you even what it is and you who know nothing in the facts. you say i am wrong. you know what i have for lunch? you will be wrong again. you do not know.
why do you try to slow me with the time wasting questions. you will not answer i refuse to answer any more of the time wasting tactics.

I WILL NOT SHOW YOU MY GODE. COODBYE.

I'd say you had fish for your lunch.

Am I right?

so it is obvious to me. and it is me who is doing this work not you.

That is EXACTLY the point
since "it is me who is doing this work" of course "it is obvious to me"

HOWEVER

all your posts have assumed that it is obvious to us as well.

with the skimpy descriptions you have given it is BY NO MEANS "obvious to us"

You are not the first posting here assuming that you are communicating with mindreaders

Erik

all everyone said here was a waste of my precious or valuable time.

That's flat-out impossible. Writing here consumes only one person's time: the one writing. As I said here before: the only one wasting your time here is you.

And you do so largely by believing your own illusions of grandeur more than the people trying to correct you. Since you're so immune to advice, and even proud of that: by all means don't let anyone keep you from running into that concrete wall at your own speed. Be prepared for a resounding chorus of "We told you so!", though.

the 3rd posibility is i a right and you dont understand.

If you knew how to read, you might have noticed I was listing "reasonably likely" possibilities. That one isn't.

you think you know so much about my project.

I challenge you to explain how you arrived at that conclusion from my posting. Go ahead, try.

you say i am wrong.

Once again you fail at the rather basic skill of reading. I said you were probably wrong when you assessed your own work. And since just about everybody on this world regularly is, that's a pretty safe bet.

why do you try to slow me with the time wasting questions.

... and again, you failed to read. I asked no question.

I WILL NOT SHOW YOU MY GODE.

And you seriously believed that would be a shocking disappointment to us, don't you? No, please don't answer that.