Olin Lathrop wrote:

> I think all numbers should be interpreted as decimal unless they are
> explicitly coded to indicate otherwise.

Hi Olin,

Can I twist your arm a little to change your ways? :)

In my opinion, this should not be decided at compile time as it is with the
RADIX control directive (or lack thereof) under MPASM -- it should be
explicitly coded in the source code by using an explicit radix before *each*
and *every* constant.

Everyone of course has free will, and your method is fine within a
controlled environment and if others follow your conventions, but this could
lead to problems when code is shared with others as I have previously
explained in a recent post.

You want to have "strong type naming" with constants so that anyone who uses
your code will get the same results. It's all about forcing consistency
right? MPASM's RADIX control directive (and its default hex radix if you
don't use the RADIX control directive) just encourages "weak type naming".

I'm just trying to raise awareness here. We talk a lot on the PICLIST of
doing things the right way and I think the *best* coding practice with
regard to constants is to always explicitly specify the radix with each
constant.

Doesn't this make better sense?

Best regards,

Ken Pergola

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body