| ??? 08/06/07 10:49 Read: times |
#142808 - Use both Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Re-reading my post in light on Andy's comment, I realise I could have phrased it better. Using the code modifier on an 8051 is not always optional, so you should use both in this example. I've been reading the C++ FAQs book, so I'm a convert to the concept of "const correctness", as it's a useful component of the compiler type safety checks.
As someone who writes for a range of compilers and micros, I've come to dislike extensions intensely. Unfortunately they are necessary, but I sure wish they were standardised (in which case they probably wouldn't be extensions ...) |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| A Simpler Way? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Logical AND ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Shift? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I Agree. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Another Option | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the simplest way | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| capitals | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I copyued what the OP used | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The common use of CAPs in C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| totally agree, however | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why are you rambling about variables... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not to me | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Variable capitalisation? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 'code 'never is | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Did not think it mattered. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Code modifier | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| both | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Use both | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| C++ ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Mixed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Extensions | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Experience | 01/01/70 00:00 |