That's good! It also avoids the "preserve carry" issue.

Harold


> On 3/16/07, William Chops Westfield <westfw@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> > SendMorseCharA
>> >        RLF   MorseChar,f  ; shift msb into carry
>> >        movf  MorseChar,f  ; test to see if we're done
>> >        bz    SendMorseCharZ ; We're done, get out
>     movlw DITLEN
>     skpc               ; skip if dit
>     movlw DAHLEN
>> >        call  DoBit        ; go send bit
>> >        call  InterBitDelay
>> >        goto  SendMorseCharA ; go send next bit, if any
>> > SendMorseCharZ
>> >        return              ; we're outta here!
>
>> Speaking of C compilers, this is a good example of the sort of
>> code that I think it would be really difficult for a C compiler
>> to generate; It's what I meant by "explicit use of carry."
>
> I'd do something like the above instead since the difference between a
> dit and a dah is their length...
>
>  > (And on the third hand, it is perhaps also an example of optimization
>> that doesn't need to be done.)
>
> True.
>
> Orin.
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>


-- 
FCC Rules Updated Daily at http://www.hallikainen.com - Advertising
opportunities available!
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist