On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 23:37:24 -0000, "Michael Rigby-Jones" said: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu [mailto:piclist-bounces@mit.edu] On > Behalf > > Of Bob Blick > > Sent: 08 March 2008 21:19 > > To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. > > Subject: Re: [PIC] Mixing MPASM and C (Hi-Tech PICC) > > > > I guess my point is that letting a statement like this pass without > > warning: > > > > if (x = 9) > > > > is just one more thing I don't like about Hi-Tech > > > I'd be quite upset if that passed without any warning, but having just > tried a quick example project for both 16F and 18F targets both give a > warning for me. The compiler versions I have are fairly old however, > maybe the newer ones are broken? > > On the contrary one of the major annoyances (to me) was that perfectly > innocuous code could produce multiple warnings, making it hard to sort > the wheat from the chaff. E.g. the traditional do{ ... } while(0) used > to make a multi-line macro safe would raise 3 or 4 warnings wherever the > macro was invoked. OK, the newer versions give a warning(constant conditional blah blah, possible use of '=' instead of'==' blah blah 140 character warning line), so I guess I must be pretty good about not making that mistake anymore and it only doesn't warn on versions earlier than you or I are using. Cheerful regards, Bob -- http://www.fastmail.fm - The professional email service -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist