Re: A89: Re: 89 timer

Re: A89: Re: 89 timer

• To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org
• Subject: Re: A89: Re: 89 timer
• From: TGaArdvark@aol.com
• Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 03:09:45 EDT
• Delivered-To: assembly-89-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
• Reply-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org

> What does a maskable on interrupt have to do with anything?
> All that means is that the on interrupt will be called even if
> interrupts are disabled.  To have a clock running all the time,
> the processor would be turned on and off ~200 times a
> second.  That's going to seriously effect battery life, and the
> lithium battery alone can't run the processor.

No, you have it backwards.  I said MASKABLE interrupt, not
non-maskable (sheesh, how could one get those confused :-).
Anyway, the point I made with that is that the processor is
ALREADY turned on and off 200 times a second whether the
calculator is on or not.  Otherwise, it could not check for the
ON key.

• Re: A89: Re: 89 timer
• From: "Ben Shakal" <bshakal@jhs.net>

• Prev: A89: Re: A83: TI and their Calc OSs
• Next: Re: A89: Re: 89 timer
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread