Re: Why ISR contains no arguments and return type is void
From: Active8 (reply2group_at_ndbbm.net)
Date: 08/24/04
- Next message: Jonathan Kirwan: "Re: Engineering Mathematics"
- Previous message: John Larkin: "Re: Wheeeeee! New PSpice Benchmarks"
- In reply to: Ben Bradley: "Re: Why ISR contains no arguments and return type is void"
- Next in thread: keith: "Re: Why ISR contains no arguments and return type is void"
- Reply: keith: "Re: Why ISR contains no arguments and return type is void"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:03:18 -0400
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:24:56 -0400, Ben Bradley wrote:
<snip>
> IIRC, the Mac used a similar instruction (one word, basically "go
> to vector x in the vector table") named trap in the 68000, and these
> OS calls were called 'trap' calls. At least that didn't cause the
> confusion over the name interrupt.
>
Yup. TRAP. That *is* a better name. The whole chip made sense.
<snip>
>
> And there's always comp.arch.embedded.
>
Oh yeah.
-- Best Regards, Mike
- Next message: Jonathan Kirwan: "Re: Engineering Mathematics"
- Previous message: John Larkin: "Re: Wheeeeee! New PSpice Benchmarks"
- In reply to: Ben Bradley: "Re: Why ISR contains no arguments and return type is void"
- Next in thread: keith: "Re: Why ISR contains no arguments and return type is void"
- Reply: keith: "Re: Why ISR contains no arguments and return type is void"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]