William "Chops" Westfield wrote:

> Unless this is a standard and common construct where you work or go to
> school, I urge conversion to the MUCH more common: "for (i=0; i<50;
> i++)" form.  Any reasonable compiler should produce similar code 

On most smaller micros, there is a difference between upcounting loops
and downcounting loops. A "decrement and branch on zero" instruction is
frequently available with a single instruction cycle, whereas an
"increment and branch if equal to value" instruction usually needs to be
coded in several assembly instructions.

So a (slightly better, and possibly more used in good code) way to write
it your style would be: for( i=50; i!=0; --i). And this should really
compile to the same as for( i=50; --i; ).

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