Silly HP-41C Question
|
07-31-2016, 02:47 AM
Post: #5
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Silly HP-41C Question
(07-31-2016 02:26 AM)rprosperi Wrote: They can all be the same label number since there is no branching. Also, IIRC, there are some synthetic label statements that execute faster than normal ones, but this is only a distant and very hazy memory so this may not be correct (but checking into synthetics will help to re-acquaint you with the 41 - I recommend Wickes' green book). No, there are no such labels, you can make the program faster by omitting labels and have precompiled jumps (works as long as you do not make indirect calls or want the A-J local labels on the top rows), but that is tricky and is sure to make your poor goose never take off. Wickes' book is very old. It was written before the byte grabber was found (F7), instead it uses the byte jumper (F0 I think). I would not recommend it as the primary source. "Extend your HP41" is a better primary source. HÃ¥kan |
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Messages In This Thread |
Silly HP-41C Question - smp - 07-30-2016, 11:37 PM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - hth - 07-31-2016, 12:58 AM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - smp - 07-31-2016, 01:29 AM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - rprosperi - 07-31-2016, 02:26 AM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - hth - 07-31-2016 02:47 AM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - rprosperi - 07-31-2016, 02:21 PM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - hth - 07-31-2016, 05:07 PM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - smp - 08-11-2016, 11:16 PM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - Sylvain Cote - 08-11-2016, 11:36 PM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - smp - 08-11-2016, 11:59 PM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - rprosperi - 08-12-2016, 12:45 AM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - smp - 08-12-2016, 01:37 AM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - Dieter - 08-12-2016, 06:05 AM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - Sylvain Cote - 08-12-2016, 09:13 AM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - smp - 08-12-2016, 12:02 PM
RE: Silly HP-41C Question - rprosperi - 08-12-2016, 09:54 PM
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)