Indeed, I know what it does, and how it works..

It's still a confusing format. =20

But then, to be fair, we have inherited a large chunk of code 8000 lines+ w=
ith hardly any indentation, and lots of "strange"=20
coding techniques. =20
I guess we all have our own idiosyncrasies.


On Mon 12/03/12 12:14 PM , alan.b.pearce@stfc.ac.uk sent:
> > 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.
>=20
> The reason for using the=20
>=20
> If (0 =3D=3D x) {...
>=20
> is to throw an error if one of the =3D signs is accidently left out givin=
g 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 co=
de
> is supposed to be if (x =3D b) {...
>=20
> i.e. you mean to do the assignment, but the if() statement is looking at
> the value of b to see if the statement should be executed - obfuscated co=
de
> forever ...--=20
> Scanned by iCritical.
>=20
> --=20
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archiveView/change your membersh=
ip options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>=20
>=20



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