We are running a survey to help us improve the experience for all of our members. If you see the survey appear, please take the time to tell us about your experience if you can.
I have a segment of codes as follows. 'app' is a structure variable.
The code can successfully pass the compiling process and run but contains some inexecutable important commands, which can't be recognized by compiler, e.g.app.bT = TRUE. Besides, there are some disordered jump inside the switch, e.g. jumping from case 1 to case 5 without executing "break" in case 1.
app.bT=FALSE;
do {
switch ( ix )
{
case 0: if ( app.f0< app.fB1 ) app.bT = TRUE; break;
case 1: if (( app.fB1 <= app.f0 )&&( app.f0<= app.fB2 ) ) {if ( app.fC1 > ( ( app.fM1 * app.f0 ) +( app.f_Allowed - app.fM1* app.fB2 ) ) ) app.bT= TRUE; } break;
case 2: if ( app.f0>app.f_Allowed) app.bT = TRUE;
break;
case 3: if (( app.f0 <= app.fB4 ) ) { if ( app.fT > ( ( app.fM2 * app.f0 ) +( app.f_Allowed -app.fM2*app.fB3 ) ) ) app.bT = TRUE; } break;
case 4: if ( app.f0> app.fB4 ) app.bT = TRUE; break; default: break;
}
ix++;
while ( ix < 5 && app.bT == FALSE );
I think it's the internal error of C51 since there are few other explanation for this strange problem but I still don't want to believe that's true. Would you please give me an answer? Thank you for your help.
"e.g. from case1 to case 5"
If you want to discuss your code, please re-post it properly - I can't even see a case 5 in your original post!
There are 8 cases inside the codes, but there are no big difference between statments inside those cases. So I just posted 4 with respect to efficiency. I am sorry about that.
What I want to tell you is that, when the code contains complex statements with 'do while', 'switch' and 'if' statements inside, you should not set the code optimization level very high in order to prevent such errors.
"are no big difference between statments inside those cases."
Which is exactly the kind of thing that an optimiser will spot, and then it will re-order the code to avoid the duplication!
" I just posted 4 with respect to efficiency"
But what you posted was totally illegible, wasn't it?!
"What I want to tell you is that ... you should not set the code optimization level very high in order to prevent such errors."
That is misleading advice!
You could justifiably say, as many have before, "if you want source-level debuginng, do not use high optimisation" - but to claim that the higher optimisation levels produce faulty code certainly needs some serious evidence!