| Mahesh Joshi 06/22/09 08:16 Read: 195 times Mumbai India |
#166346 - "bit" is more useful Responding to: Girish Nikam's previous message |
Dear Girish,
It is good that your code is now working by use of "volatile" But, remember you are working with MCS51 fly. This fly supports a veriety of bit operation. Try to take advantage of it. If the variable is going to assume only 2 values (True & False), I would prefer declaring it as "bit". Using "int" or "char" (signed or unsigned) instead of bit is OK, but it increases code as well as RAM memory required by program. (Your current example may not need it, but in future this can verywell help you) Also execution time increases due to integer operations. just for example: int my_int; my_int = 0; asm generated will be something like this mov dptr,#_my_int clr a movx @dptr,a inc dptr movx @dptr,a on other hand if you use bit bit my_bit my_bit = 0; the asm generated would be something like clr _my_bit Regards, Mahesh |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| UART code porting to SDCC | Girish Nikam | 06/21/09 13:29 |
| doesn't SDCC warn about line 36? | Frieder Ferlemann | 06/21/09 13:59 |
| that's it | Jan Waclawek | 06/21/09 15:03 |
| ah ha | Jez Smith | 06/21/09 15:08 |
| Don't blame the optimiser! | Andy Neil | 06/22/09 01:36 |
| doesn't SDCC warn about line 36 | Girish Nikam | 06/21/09 22:13 |
| hmmm | Jez Smith | 06/22/09 00:42 |
modified dog | Andy Peters | 06/23/09 14:21 |
| I cannot remember now | Jez Smith | 06/21/09 14:33 |
| xmt_flag., why "int"? | Mahesh Joshi | 06/22/09 01:53 |
| if you want to use it as "int" / "char" | Andy Neil | 06/22/09 02:47 |
| You destroy succeding putchar()'s | David Prentice | 06/22/09 05:14 |
| "Volatile" Helps | Girish Nikam | 06/22/09 07:42 |
| "bit" is more useful | Mahesh Joshi | 06/22/09 08:16 |
| buzzzzz | Erik Malund | 06/22/09 08:37 |
| family | Jan Waclawek | 06/22/09 13:44 |
| stdbool | Oliver Sedlacek | 06/23/09 06:44 |



