??? 11/08/05 22:27 Read: times |
#103446 - OK, nevermind. The whole code is way too Responding to: ???'s previous message |
big to post. The comments in the ASM are those generated by SDCC. It is exactly as SDCC generates it. I did cut-n-paste the section of ASM that deals with the FOR loop.
My only question about the 80c552 was whether or not an ADC conversion puts the rest of the program execution on hold. The Philips documentation doesn't say. Their example program seems to hint that the conversion is done in parallel. I assure you, the code compiles, runs, and sends back a report of voltages measured over a short interval. It's just the timestamps were 120 cycles apart which I thought was disappointing. Counting cycles in the FOR loop ASM code added up to 70. |
Topic | Author | Date |
Timing of A/D conversion on 80c552 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
show your code | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
sorry, here is the loop and the ISR | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I see no such thing, please cut and past | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
you're right. I took out the setting of | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
PLEASE cut and paste, as is it will not | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
OK, nevermind. The whole code is way too | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
often the reason for an unexplainable pr | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Funny you mention that![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
inconsistent | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
since wwe all know that you get what you | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
True. I fully expect to have to study | 01/01/70 00:00 |