All,

 I didn't say it was better.  But it is explicit.  And as far as 'BANKSEL'
 is concerned, I assumed it was a macro.  I personally don't bother with
 macros.  To me, they tend to complicate things.   If you want to use them
 and like them, I have no problem with that.  I just like to write my code
 so it is easy to follow.  To me, the best way to that end is to not use
 macros, and write everything in a straight forward manner.

                                              Regards,

                                                Jim

 P.S.  I didn't think you were being rude.  You were just stating your
       opinion.   This likewise is my opinion, so I hope you won't think
       I'm being rude.



> pic microcontroller discussion list wrote:
>>  I'm not sure what BANKSEL PORTA is supposed to do.
>
> I don't mean to be rude, but then why don't you look it up?
> FWIW, it makes sure the correct bank to access PORTA is
>selected. The assembler does it for you, so there's less
> chance of human error.
>
>>      Then to read the port, just do a movf 0x05, 0
>>
>>  This will move the contents of PORTA into the 'w' register.
>
> that's exactly what the OP's code did! except that I find the
> original code was much clearer and better documented than
> your example.
>
> why is your "movf 0x05, 0" better than the "movf PORTA, w"
> in the original post?
>
> I *really* don't mean to be rude, but I understand if it comes
> across that way. I think (as will many others) that your
>suggestion is a very bad idea. The symbolic names are there for
> a reason. The code is much clearer with the symbolic names.
>
> Phil Eisermann
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
> email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

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