> int i_eeprom;
> char EEADR_L;
> char EEADR_H;
> EEADR_L = (char) (i_eeprom & 0x00FF);
> EEADR_H = (char) ((i_eeprom / 256) & 0x00FF);
>
> And it works, but I think there is a better way to do this.
> Any thoughts?

unsigned int i_eeprom;
unsigned char EEADR_H, EEADR_L;
EEADR_L = (unsigned char) (i_eeprom & 0xFF)
EEADR_H = (unsigned char) (i_eeprom >> 8);

I don't know if this is "better", but the EEADR_H assignment should generate
less code.

michael brown

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads