| ??? 05/03/06 15:31 Read: times |
#115479 - exceptions? Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Richard Erlacher said:
I don't think it matters WHERE the value of 0x00 is stored, so much as what happens in an 8-bit system when it's decremented. It's already been stated, and quite correctly, that this is going to be 0xFF I suppose there could be special cases where decrementing a byte value of 0x00 might not give 0xFF? The most likely case to my mind would be a system that has been specially designed with a constraint such that decrementing 0x00 leaves you with 0x00 - ie, a kind of "end-stop" at zero, rather than a "roll-over"? That's why I said: Similarly decrementing a byte value of 0x00 will usually give you a byte value of 0xFF.
http://www.8052.com/forum/read.phtml?id=115446 (emphasis added) Similarly, incrementing a byte value of 0xFF will usually give you a byte value of 0x00 |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| DEC 0H ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| dec | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| How you figure its memory location zero? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Because | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| assumption... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| think of it like a clock | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| i think it's bible time | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ASSUME = ASS U ME read and head. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| but the answer will still be in "the bib | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| It's in the title! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| rely on history | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| exceptions? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not exactly that ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| DEC R6 ! (8051 chip) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the description of the DEC instruction | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Good! Erick | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| why work from print | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I do ! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Surely that's justification enough. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I did not suggest that | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I did not suggest that ! .... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Think about an ordometer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| control apps | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| In decimal mode ... | 01/01/70 00:00 |