Orin,

thanks for your replay.
on top of the code I have:  int i;
but it is better to include in the loop.

thanks again.

Andre



-----Original Message-----
From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu [mailto:piclist-bounces@mit.edu]On Behalf
Of Orin Eman
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 10:40 AM
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
Subject: Re: [PIC] ignoring a few byte "problem"


On 10/12/06, Lee Jones <lee@frumble.claremont.edu> wrote:
> > I can't quite figure out what it's doing wrong but you have :-
> >
> > for(i=0;i<BUFFER_SIZE;++i)
> >
> > and then later on
> >
> > if (i==0 && read_data == 0x42) continue
> >
> > but by pre incrementing i, it can never equal 0 in the [...] if statement.
>
> But the increment of i as part of the for statement does not occur
> until after the entire compound statement has finished executing
> (possibly due to an early exit via a continue statement).
>
>
> C's for construct is a consise way of writing a while loop control
> construct.  The following
>
>     for (expression1; expression2; expression3)
>         <statement>
>
> is handled by the compiler as
>
>     expression1;
>     while (expression2)
>     {
>         <statement>;
>         expression3;
>     }
>
> and <statement> can be either a simple or a compound statement.

Microsoft's latest C++ is interpreting it as:

  {
    expression1;
    while (expression2)
    {
       <statement>;
       expression3;
    }
  }

Precluding something like:

for ( int i = 0; i < COUNT; i++ )  // Legal C++
{
}

for ( i = 0; i < COUNT; i++ )  // Error, i is undefined
{
}

FYI, Orin.
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist