Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!mephisto!mcnc!rti!sas!walker
From: walker@sas.UUCP (Doug Walker)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Lattice bugs still?
Message-ID: <1379@sas.UUCP>
Date: 13 Dec 89 14:31:13 GMT
References: <10415@etana.tut.fi>
Reply-To: walker@sas.UUCP (Doug Walker)
Organization: SAS Institute Inc, Cary NC
Lines: 45

In article <10415@etana.tut.fi> pl@sparrow.tut.fi (Lehtinen Pertti) writes:
>
>	I've been using Lattice 4.0 and now I had a chance to test 5.0.2
>	and found out following facts:
>
>	1)
>		In asm 'moveml xx(pc),...' generates still wrong offset.

We were quite surprised to hear this... which you seem to have known about
since version 4.0.  5.04 fixed all REPORTED bugs, but this one has never
been reported to us.

Investigation indicates that

   *) The bug only happens with movem, move is safe
   *) It only happens with relocations -   foo(pc)  not   6(pc)

Please contact Lattice tech support to report the problem and to
get a patch for it.

>	2)
>		I can now use variables defined as __chip, but
>		following caused still sime problems.
... (example deleted)
>		Well, above example isn't exact, but
>		point is that reference with variable as index was ok
>		but with constant wasn't.
This has also not been reported and we could not reproduce it with any
version of the compiler.  I doubt seriously the problem exists in as
simple a form as you have shown, or the compiler itself would have failed
to compile, much less any test cases.  Please get a sample program to
Lattice tech support as soon as possible.  

Lattice tech support - (312) 916-1100
        FAX          - (312) 916-1190

or call the Lattice BBS or BIX.


  ***** 
 *|_o_o|\\     Doug Walker, Software Distiller
 *|. o.| ||
  | o  |//     "READY!   FIRE!   AIM!  (Software under development!)"
  ======
usenet: ...mcnc!rti!sas!walker   plink: dwalker  bix: djwalker