How can you get a while loop inside an if statement to compile

I am trying to optimize code so that the embedded system runs faster. Here is my question:

Can someone explain to me why this doesn't compile.

Code:

---

BYTE B;
B = 1;
if(while(delay), B){
...
}

---

Here the while loop is simply introducing a delay. "delay" is actually a complicated function that eventually returns 0. The details of this is irrelevant. Notice i didn't put any bracket near the while loop or any semicolon but instead i put a comma (because i'm inside an "if" statement, i cannot use a semicolon). We know that the result of the comma separated list is the last element of the list. The result of the argument of the if statement is B. While this doesn't compile, i can create a function that is equivalent:

Code:

---


BYTE func(void)
{
    BYTE B;
    B = 1;
    whille(delay);
    return B;
}

Then i can do the following:

if(func()){
...
}

---

The latter will compile but i want to avoid a function call because that adds overhead. My ultimate goal is to optimize the code. Why is the function call compiling and not the earlier code. What can i do to make it compile without using a function call? A "for" loop doesn't work either and i cannot use goto statements. I don't want to use machine code at this time unless i don't have a choice. My compiler doesn't allow "inline" functions. Is this even possible?

A while loop cannot be used as an operand, therefore it can not be used with the comma operator. Your code would be equivalent to:

Code:

---

while(delay);
if(B) {
    ...
}

---

Thanks bithhub. Wow that turned out to be a simple solution!!! You have no idea how long i have tried to make this work. Now i can make my code much more efficient.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marcogeneva

I am trying to optimize code so that the embedded system runs faster. Here is my question:

Can someone explain to me why this doesn't compile.

Code:

---

BYTE B;
B = 1;
if(while(delay), B){
...
}

---

Here the while loop is simply introducing a delay. "delay" is actually a complicated function that eventually returns 0. The details of this is irrelevant. Notice i didn't put any bracket near the while loop or any semicolon but instead i put a comma (because i'm inside an "if" statement, i cannot use a semicolon). We know that the result of the comma separated list is the last element of the list. The result of the argument of the if statement is B. While this doesn't compile, i can create a function that is equivalent:

Code:

---


BYTE func(void)
{
    BYTE B;
    B = 1;
    whille(delay);
    return B;
}

Then i can do the following:

if(func()){
...
}

---

The latter will compile but i want to avoid a function call because that adds overhead. My ultimate goal is to optimize the code. Why is the function call compiling and not the earlier code. What can i do to make it compile without using a function call? A "for" loop doesn't work either and i cannot use goto statements. I don't want to use machine code at this time unless i don't have a choice. My compiler doesn't allow "inline" functions. Is this even possible?

---

if(while(delay), B)

Is this while loop correct because the op says that in a multiple operands in the if loop what gets evaluated is the last element in the list? THEN Can we have an if statement like

if(func(), func1(), func2(),...., funcn()) and it would be equivalent to

if(funcn());

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roaan

if(while(delay), B)

Is this while loop correct because the op says that in a multiple operands in the if loop what gets evaluated is the last element in the list? THEN Can we have an if statement like

if(func(), func1(), func2(),...., funcn()) and it would be equivalent to

if(funcn());

---

You can put several expressions (while() isn't an expression) inside the parentheses of an if, but they will all be evaluated left-to-right. But the only that will be checked for true-or-false is funcn, that part is right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tabstop

You can put several expressions (while() isn't an expression) inside the parentheses of an if, but they will all be evaluated left-to-right. But the only that will be checked for true-or-false is funcn, that part is right.

---

Wow, even I didn't know that.
I just tried this and it worked:

Code:

---

if ( a = 4, b = 3, c = 1, a - b - c )

---

Is it guaranteed that the expressions will always be evaluated in order from left to right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roaan

if(while(delay), B)

Is this while loop correct because the op says that in a multiple operands in the if loop what gets evaluated is the last element in the list? THEN Can we have an if statement like

if(func(), func1(), func2(),...., funcn()) and it would be equivalent to

if(funcn());

---

As tabstop mentioned, while() is not an expression. To add to it, because of the comma operator, the multiple operands, are evaluted left to right (associativity of comma operator), and that's why the most right opearnd actually is assigned as in your case of if(funcn()).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cpjust

Wow, even I didn't know that.
I just tried this and it worked:

Code:

---

if ( a = 4, b = 3, c = 1, a - b - c )

---

Is it guaranteed that the expressions will always be evaluated in order from left to right?

---

comma operator has the lowest precedence and thus = is done first and then LtoR associativity. It is guaranteed except when the parantheses are used.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marcogeneva

Now i can make my code much more efficient.

---

Doubtful - Probably at best you'll make it shorter.
Given you're still learning the syntax of C, you wont have a clue what it takes to get the compiler to generate the most efficient code. Shorter code isn't necessarily faster, and even adding a line of code without changing any other lines can make something faster. Don't assume that the code written with the while loop in a function will necessarily be any slower at all.
Write code for clarity; don't prematurely optimise.

Actually to figure out if the code is more efficient, you just need to look at the assembly code generated which is easy. Yes in most cases clarity is important but in this particular case, we can't release the product because of a performance issue so in this situation, optimization takes precedence over clarity. There is no doubt that avoiding a function call makes the code more efficient. When making a function call, variables needs to be put on the stack which takes a few extra clock cycles. Even the most experienced programmer makes a beginners mistake once in a while. I guess i wasn't thinking out of the box.