gnupic: PIC18F47J53


Previous by date: 12 Aug 2013 18:14:40 -0000 Re: PIC18F47J53, Marko Kohtala
Next by date: 12 Aug 2013 18:14:40 -0000 Re: PIC18F47J53, Luis de Arquer
Previous in thread: 12 Aug 2013 18:14:40 -0000 Re: PIC18F47J53, Marko Kohtala
Next in thread: 12 Aug 2013 18:14:40 -0000 Re: PIC18F47J53, Luis de Arquer

Subject: Re: PIC18F47J53
From: KHMan ####@####.####
Date: 12 Aug 2013 18:14:40 -0000
Message-Id: <520925CB.5080904@gmail.com>

On 8/13/2013 1:52 AM, Luis de Arquer wrote:
> Hi Bob,
>
> Thanks for the info, since that was something I didn't know anyway.
>
> As you say, that may not be the problem after all. The 'sleep_a_while'
> function that is called in between is defined as (in C code)
>
> void sleep_a_while(byte c)
> {
>    byte i,j;
>
>    for(i=0; i<200; i++)
>      for(j=0; j<c; j++) ;
> }
>
> so surely it has enough time to settle.
>
> I have seen some examples around using lots of config words for the
> PIC, while I am only using these:
>
>      CONFIG    OSC=INTOSC,WDTEN=OFF
>
> I have read all of the other config words and thought I don't need any
> more, but maybe I am missing shtg?

Not much else to eliminate...  analog config, open drain settings, 
etc., but your first example works.

What happens if you toggle LATB instead? Then the datapath would 
not need to sample PORTB. Or toggle the whole byte?

> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Bob Jacobsen wrote:
>> On Aug 12, 2013, at 9:58 AM, Luis de Arquer wrote:
>>[snipped all]

-- 
Cheers,
Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia


Previous by date: 12 Aug 2013 18:14:40 -0000 Re: PIC18F47J53, Marko Kohtala
Next by date: 12 Aug 2013 18:14:40 -0000 Re: PIC18F47J53, Luis de Arquer
Previous in thread: 12 Aug 2013 18:14:40 -0000 Re: PIC18F47J53, Marko Kohtala
Next in thread: 12 Aug 2013 18:14:40 -0000 Re: PIC18F47J53, Luis de Arquer


Powered by ezmlm-browse 0.20.