Re: TI-H: Expanders?

To: ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: TI-H: Expanders?
From: Bryan Rittmeyer <bryanr@flash.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 00:12:35 -0400
Delivered-To: ti-hardware-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
References: <Pine.SOL.3.95q.980715201659.15899A-100000@y.glue.umd.edu> <l0313030fb1d297e0b991@[192.168.1.66]> <l0313032db1d2b486756b@[192.168.1.66]>
Reply-To: ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org

Grant Stockly wrote:

> I'm not making fun of the deadlines...  :)  It works, thats my point.  Your
> timing delay needs to be fixed in order to work right on the 10MHz
> resonator.  You don't get 50ns on any of the AVRs...  :(  Atmel was
> actually advertising 20MHz versions of all its chips for a while.

Hahaha, you have the firmware revision with the delay still in it?
That is one old sucker grant... I slowed the clock to 4 MHz and
yanked the delay loop altogether. There is still a small one between
bytes when the E2 is sending, but that is to keep the TI-92 FIFO
from overflowing. Delay code is usually only needed when something
is wrong with another portion of the code, and there were plenty of
bugs in the version I sent you, trust me.

That is why you actually have to go through months of testing and
re-writing before something like the E2 is 'done' Writing the
firmware and thinking it should work simply doesn't cut it. I'm
not accusing, I'm just saying, with most hardware/assembly programs
you spend 10% of the time designing and 90% of the time re-designing.

Bryan

-- 
Bryan Rittmeyer
mailto:bryanr@flash.net
http://www.flash.net/~bryanr/

Follow-Ups:

Re: TI-H: Expanders?

From: Grant Stockly <gussie@alaska.net>

References:

TI-H: Expanders?

From: "Eric M. Fiterman" <ericf@Glue.umd.edu>

RE: TI-H: Expanders?

From: Grant Stockly <gussie@alaska.net>

Re: TI-H: Expanders?

From: Grant Stockly <gussie@alaska.net>

Prev: Re: TI-H: Expanders?
Next: Re: TI-H: Fixing Grant's friend's PC
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread