You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 2, 2018. It is now read-only.
All relative jump targets act as if there is an implicit .[+][-] in front of them.
rjmp 12 is currently the same as rjmp .+2.
GCC does not do this. It treats 12 as an absolute address, and then subtracts it from the program counter to create a relative address, and this will then be the operand to the relative branch.
I don't think this is particularly high priority, as it is very uncommon (and bad practice) to use magic numbers in branch instructions (labels should be used instead). However, this is still not the correct output so it's still very important.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
RJMP .+12
is properly encoded.RJMP 12
is not.In fact they are treated and encoded the same.
All relative jump targets act as if there is an implicit
.[+][-]
in front of them.rjmp 12
is currently the same asrjmp .+2
.GCC does not do this. It treats
12
as an absolute address, and then subtracts it from the program counter to create a relative address, and this will then be the operand to the relative branch.I don't think this is particularly high priority, as it is very uncommon (and bad practice) to use magic numbers in branch instructions (labels should be used instead). However, this is still not the correct output so it's still very important.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: