On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 08:15:31AM +0100, Michael Rigby-Jones wrote:

> which is very close apart from the bank switching (bcf 3,5).  This looks
> like the age old problem of unnecessary bank switching, can the compiler not
> be persuaded that the bcf isn't needed?

It's not that it's unnecessary, but that it should be moved outside
the loop. Just needs a bit more work in the optimizer. Then you
have to make sure it doesn't break anything else...

Regards, Clyde

--
Clyde Smith-Stubbs               |            HI-TECH Software
Email: clyde@htsoft.com          |          Phone            Fax
WWW:   http://www.htsoft.com/    | USA: (408) 490 2885  (408) 490 2885
PGP:   finger clyde@htsoft.com   | AUS: +61 7 3355 8333 +61 7 3355 8334
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HI-TECH C: compiling the real world.