Thanks, Alex.  As you suspected, the problem turned out to be in the
comment lines immediately preceding the delay_1_msec function
declaration.  The errors disappeared once I removed those comment
lines.

Now I understand why it's so important to archive the source code as
you accomplish various things while working on a program.  Even
comment lines can be misinterpreted by a compiler.

How can comment lines be misinterpreted by a compiler?  Comment lines
are SUPPOSED to be ignored by the compiler.  What went wrong here?

More importantly, how do you tell if a compiler is misinterpreting
your source code?  My code looked fine in MPLAB, Geany, and Leafpad.
I don't know how I'm supposed to tell if I'm relying on editing tools
that don't show me what the compiler sees.

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Alex Harford <harford@gmail.com> wrote:
> I know, but there is something funny going on. =A0I looked at it with
> 'xxd' and you have a CR/^M/0x0D with no LF/0x0A, and I will bet that's
> confusing the compiler.
>
> I'm willing to bet if you took these lines out:
>
> // This method of providing delays isn't efficient with respect to
> clock cycles. =A0It takes 9 usec to decrement a variable. =A0However, it
> does work.^M// Purists advocate inserting Assembly language into the
> code. =A0My attempts to implement this were not successful.
> // Executing delay_1_msec 1000 times takes about 1 sec.^M//void
> delay_1_msec (void)
>
> and retyped
>
> void delay_1_msec (void)
>
> with the remaining part of the function uncommented, it would work.
>

-- =

Jason Hsu
http://www.jasonhsu.com/swrwatt.html
http://www.jasonhsu.com/swrwatt-c.txt
http://www.jasonhsu.com/swrwatt-asm.txt

-- =

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