On 7 Sep, 01:27, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:> Jim Mack wrote: > > ... snip ... > > > At one point you say "2 stop bits", but your comment here indicates > > 1 stop bit. I don't know anything about your platform so I can't say > > whether your comments or your code are in error, but they do differ. > > > 8N2 is an unusual requirement. > > If you use it only for transmission you gain a bit on the clock > accuracy required, at the cost of transmission speed. > > Please don't exceed 72 chars in transmitted lines. 67 is better. > > -- > Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net) > Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems. > <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> > > -- > Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.comHi , I dont understand this last comment why is 67 better? Thanks Rate
LED Display
Started by ●September 6, 2007
Reply by ●September 7, 20072007-09-07
Reply by ●September 7, 20072007-09-07
ratemonotonic wrote:> CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote: >... snip ...>> >> Please don't exceed 72 chars in transmitted lines. 67 is better. >>... snip quoted sig area ...> > I dont understand this last comment why is 67 better?Because the lines are shorter, and better able to withstand quoteing. Also, please ensure you snip all sig areas, unless you are commenting on them. -- Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net) Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems. <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Reply by ●September 7, 20072007-09-07
In article <1189152037.036663.205150@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, ratemonotonic says...> On 7 Sep, 04:04, Thad Smith <ThadSm...@acm.org> wrote: > > ratemonotonic wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > > I am working with a big LED display which interfaces with the PC by > > > RS232 (9600 baud,no parity , 2 stop bits , 8 bit, no hardware flow > > > control ). > > > I am trying to write my own application using cygwin on vista using > > > open , read and write function calls. Every thing works data is > > > comming out of com2 but is not read by the LED display , > > > I have written a basic programm which sends data to the LED display > > > this works. > > > > You have a big advantage -- a working system to compare against. > > Monitor all the lines and compare what the Basic program is sending and > > what your other application is sending. Try to mimic the working > > signals in your second program. > > > > -- > > Thad > > I have a serial port sniffer programme which moniters my com port , > the exact same out put is sent to the serial port by both programmes ,This may be belabouring the obvious but since the results are different the inputs must be different.> but the c programme doesnt work! I have also used a scope to monitor > activity on the tx line and there is always some data sent ( although > I have not decoded the bit pattern yet) .Have you verified the baud rate?> As I mentioned before the C programme transmits correctly to my palm > top directly (DCE)and to another PC with null modem. And the data > sent is always correct. > > Can the issue be to do with timing i.e. the basic programme is > interpreted and is a lot simple? where as I use read and write library > function (overhead etc.) and the LED driver is not tolerant of such > delays?I think you have that backwards, an interpreted basic program is morelikely to have delays than a compiled C program. A quick check would be to insert some arbitrary delays into your C transmissions. Robert -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Reply by ●September 8, 20072007-09-08
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 08:48:50 -0400, CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:>ratemonotonic wrote: >> CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >... snip ... >>> >>> Please don't exceed 72 chars in transmitted lines. 67 is better. >>> >... snip quoted sig area ... >> >> I dont understand this last comment why is 67 better? > >Because the lines are shorter, and better able to withstand >quoteing. Also, please ensure you snip all sig areas, unless you >are commenting on them.I really do not understand, why you would need more than 4 levels of quoting. It is much readable to write a few line summary, then use 1-2 levels of quote and then add your own text. Paul
Reply by ●September 8, 20072007-09-08
On 8 Sep, 09:35, Paul Keinanen <keina...@sci.fi> wrote:> On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 08:48:50 -0400, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> > wrote: > > >ratemonotonic wrote: > >> CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >... snip ... > > >>> Please don't exceed 72 chars in transmitted lines. 67 is better. > > >... snip quoted sig area ... > > >> I dont understand this last comment why is 67 better? > > >Because the lines are shorter, and better able to withstand > >quoteing. Also, please ensure you snip all sig areas, unless you > >are commenting on them. > > I really do not understand, why you would need more than 4 levels of > quoting. > > It is much readable to write a few line summary, then use 1-2 levels > of quote and then add your own text. > > PaulFeel really daft asking this but what is quoting ?
Reply by ●September 8, 20072007-09-08
ratemonotonic wrote:> Paul Keinanen <keina...@sci.fi> wrote: >> CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> ratemonotonic wrote: >>>> CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>>... snip ... >> >>>>> Please don't exceed 72 chars in transmitted lines. 67 is better. >> >>>... snip quoted sig area ... >> >>>> I dont understand this last comment why is 67 better? >> >>> Because the lines are shorter, and better able to withstand >>> quoteing. Also, please ensure you snip all sig areas, unless you >>> are commenting on them. >> >> I really do not understand, why you would need more than 4 levels of >> quoting. >> >> It is much readable to write a few line summary, then use 1-2 levels >> of quote and then add your own text. > > Feel really daft asking this but what is quoting ?Nothing wrong with asking. Quoting is what you do when you include some portion of the message to which you are replying in your message. Quoted lines are normally marked with an initial '>' character, and the count of those initial '>'s is the level of quoting. If you look at the attributions (lines like "Joe wrote:" at the beginning) you will find the author of the lines has one less than the quote level of '>' before the attribution (assuming somebody hasn't fouled them up). The point of quoting is that Usenet is not a reliable transmission medium, and there is no guarantee that your reader has ever, or ever will, read the originals of the quoted portion. Thus it is necessary that all messages stand alone, and the art is to remove enough quotes to avoid excess transmission, and yet carry the sense of the whole message. The links shown in my sig. below should help. -- Some useful links on quoting: <http://www.xs4all.nl/%7ewijnands/nnq/nquote.html> <http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/mail-news-errors.html> <http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote2.html> <http://www.star-one.org.uk/computer/format.htm> -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
