Rolf wrote:
> On the other hand, it's not an error to do it twice... and further,
> operations other than 'clrf' on PORTx will/may produce a different
> result than the same operation on LATx... so perhaps it is good
> practice to treat them 'both' explicitly in the initialization
> routine...

You can wave a dead fish over it too, since that will have about the same
additional effect as CLRF PORTx after you've already done CLRF LATx.  The
downside is that the extra uneeded instruction will make the system less
maintainable.  Someone will have to wonder why CLRF PORTx is in there, or
what the dead fish is doing suspended above the unit.  "Can I safely delete
this?  Do I have to leave it there?  Do I have to re-certify this thing if =
I
remove the instruction or change fish species?  What am I missing?  Or is i=
t
really as dumb as it looks?"

C'mon guys, this is engineering.  Let's leave superstitions out of it.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.