> That bring up an interesting point.  It is such a
 > common thing to
 > compare the loop counter to a result involving the
 > loop counter in some
 > sort of function

 >        (ie:  (for n=0; n that I would consider it only natural that any
 > optimizing compiler would
 > do what you did, only automatically.  Is this the
 > case?  Or should I be
 > concerned with optimizing manually - not trusting the
 > compiler
 > manufacturer?

    I wouldn't rely on it happening automatically, Neil. It's actually a
little more than an optimization. It's a real change in the program to
eliminate a needless bottleneck. I'm not sure optimizers are allowed to
take such liberties. I'd check with one of our resident gurus, like
Bob Stout or Darren McB.

    OTOH you can check for yourself by compiling both programs, each with a
slightly different name, and then check the execution times. That would be
a practical and pragmatic way to be sure of what your own favourite
compiler does.

Best Wishes,
Bill.

---