C51: Porting Code from PL/M-51

---

Information in this article applies to:

• C51, all versions

---

QUESTION

I am porting code from Intel PLM51 to Keil C51 and have a problem with the following construct:

declare loop_ptr_1 word;
declare loop_ptr_1_byte     byte public at ( .loop_ptr_1 + 1 );

I have translated this PL/M-51 statement into the following C construct:

unsigned short loop_ptr_1;
unsigned char data loop_ptr_1_byte _at_ (loop_ptr_1 + 1);

However, the Keil C51 does not allow an _at_ statement to be a variable.

How can I solve this problem?

ANSWER

The Intel PL/M-51 statement:

declare loop_ptr_1 word;
declare loop_ptr_1_byte     byte public at ( .loop_ptr_1 );

can be represented by the following C variable definition:

unsigned char xdata *loop;

To access the elements you need to write:

char xdata array[100];

loop = &array[0];    // is identical with PL/M  loop_ptr_1_word = OFFSET (array[0]);
value = *loop;       // is identical with PL/M   value = loop_ptr_1_byte;

Instead of having two variables that represent the memory address and its contents, the C language needs just one. With ptr the memory address is accessed. With *ptr the memory content is accessed.

In PL/M you might use a 'BASE' variable to address more than just one variable. This can be represented by a union in C.

Example:

union v {
  unsigned char uc[2];
  unsigned int  ui;
}

union v xdata *vptr;

vptr->uc[0];    // byte at memory location 'vptr'
vptr->uc[1];    // byte at memory location 'vptr+1'
vptr->ui;       // word value at memory location 'vptr'

In the beginning, the C constructs look a bit odd to a PL/M programmer, but after a while, you will see the benefits of the pointer constructs. The pointer has an associated type, and therefore it is a lot easier to maintain programs and view memory contents in a debugger.

MORE INFORMATION

• ANSI C Books like the "The C Programming Language" by Kernigan & Ritchie.

SEE ALSO

• C51: Is There a Translator for PL/M-51 to C?
• GENERAL: Modular Programming

---

Last Reviewed: Thursday, February 25, 2021

---

Did this article provide the answer you needed?
Yes No Not Sure