by my references, I read that the below (x = n if no break) is true. However should that not be the case, and Keil can change it there is a great risk, thus I'd like another read on it.
a for loop
for ( x = 0 ; x < n ; x++) { ....... if (cond) break; ....... } if (x = n) { // there was no break
can I count on x = n if 'cond' was never met and no break happened?
If that is not something that Keil can change, but standard, I can save a bunch of flags
Erik
" I am thankful to Keil that they spit out a warning for if (x = n)"
If 'n' is a constant, you can help to protect against this by writing the comparison the other way around; ie,
if( N == x )
because the typo would then give you something entirely invlaid:
if( N = x )