| ??? 07/17/06 12:37 Read: times |
#120372 - fine, but Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Now if I can just get the utility to work the way I think (or get trained properly) to use it for my needs.
fine, but you do realize that setbit is "a means of doing what you should not do". There are much more efficient means of achieving the same, but, unfortunately, they require that you THINK. setbit, and similar things, are examples of the "make it easier for the prograsmmer, the heck with the processor" attitude, which may be finr for multiGigaHertz machines, but often disastrous when using limited capacity chips like the '51. Of course, if what you are making is a simple calculator, even with a '51 that approach is not a problem. The most painful examples of the attitude is when it is seen in an ISR and we see the post here, "why does my thingy fail?" Erik |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| setibit | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Peter Who? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Peter Piper? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Duh, I wonder Peter Dannegger. Congraulations | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| bit access | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| bit access. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
fine, but | 01/01/70 00:00 |