The for loop doesn't need to increment the counter. The ISR is doing that i=
n
the background. I just think more conventional coding is easier to follow
and most compilers will probably produce the same code for either. (I
haven't tested this theory but past experience would cause me to be
surprised if it didn't..)

Allen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu [mailto:piclist-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf
Of
> Jan-Erik Soderholm
> Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2014 3:15 PM
> To: piclist@mit.edu
> Subject: Re: [Pic] Making a special timer!
>=20
> Aha!
>=20
> The for loop doen't have any increment of the loop variable!
>=20
> Yes, that was a bit unusual. Even if it is by-the-book when it
> comes to C standards, I'd also use some other construct, such
> as a (more normal) while loop.
>=20
> Jan-Erik.
>=20


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