> I have a colleague who insists on using this reverse syntax
>=20
> if(0 =3D=3D x) {
> ...do stuff
> }
>=20
> which I find odd to read at the best of times...
>=20
> We're using embedded C, (Hitech), and whilst
> if(x =3D0)   doesn't throw an error, it does throw a warning.
>=20
> oh well.

The reason for using the=20

If (0 =3D=3D x) {...

is to throw an error if one of the =3D signs is accidently left out giving =
an assignment instead of an equality.=20

It may well be that=20
if (x =3D 0) {...
is meant to be correct code (unlikely) but is more of a problem if the code=
 is supposed to be=20
if (x =3D b) {...

i.e. you mean to do the assignment, but the if() statement is looking at th=
e value of b to see if the statement should be executed - obfuscated code f=
orever ...
--=20
Scanned by iCritical.

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.