Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
???
06/22/06 19:14
Read: times


 		 #118870 - I know that, but 99.17% of all '51 UART
Responding to: ???'s previous message
If you have to communicate over a long distance, with large data volume at a high rate, ASYNC should be your absolute last choice.
I'm doing RS-485 ASYNC at 460bps from one end of a bus to the other

not only on the timer used as its baud rate generator
there are quite a few derivatives with a dedicated baud rate generator. Also many SILabs derivatives (e.g. f12x/f13x) allow a separate clock for the baud rate generation.

Now, I don't promote the use of Mode-0 where it won't work. There are devices other than PC's in the world though, and you should recognize that they don't all "talk" ASYNC protocol.
I know that, but 99.17% of all '51 UART communication is to asynch devices (RS-232, RS-422, RS-485, J1708, MODBUS, CAN and more)

Erik


List of 34 messages in thread
TopicAuthorDate
74hc595/597 connection with c51            01/01/70 00:00      
   Any available port pin            01/01/70 00:00      
   I'd suggest you read the datasheet            01/01/70 00:00      
      little more info as u require richard            01/01/70 00:00      
         start it simple and stupd            01/01/70 00:00      
   bit-bang            01/01/70 00:00      
      problem is ...            01/01/70 00:00      
         talking about standard '51...            01/01/70 00:00      
            That's why I want to "fix" it ...            01/01/70 00:00      
         there is'nt so why do you proselytize f            01/01/70 00:00      
            PC's are async, Mode-0 is not            01/01/70 00:00      
               I know that, but 99.17% of all '51 UART            01/01/70 00:00      
                  Do you know what UART means?            01/01/70 00:00      
                     A resounding NO. I use synchrono            01/01/70 00:00      
                        SPI??? Is that in the "bible"            01/01/70 00:00      
                           no, it is not - but it is a very well de            01/01/70 00:00      
                              You're well into nonsense, now, Erik            01/01/70 00:00      
                              you just ignore the real reason            01/01/70 00:00      
                                 This may be a valid topic, but not here.            01/01/70 00:00      
                                    Whenever you use shift registers for I/O            01/01/70 00:00      
                                       Doesn't SPI have a bunch of "features?"            01/01/70 00:00      
                                          yes, we ARE mixing, both threads touch s            01/01/70 00:00      
                                             I don't want to confuse the O/P ...            01/01/70 00:00      
                                                that would be wrong            01/01/70 00:00      
                                                   I think we've lost the O/P            01/01/70 00:00      
                           this may be the answer to your 'prayers'            01/01/70 00:00      
                              Thanks, but which prayers are those?            01/01/70 00:00      
                                 those for a fast synchronous communicati            01/01/70 00:00      
                                    I don't want to use a commercial chip            01/01/70 00:00      
                                       why not            01/01/70 00:00      
                                          If I want to use SPI, I'll build it in            01/01/70 00:00      
                  Do you know what UART means?            01/01/70 00:00      
                     ^%$#@! I didi it again!            01/01/70 00:00      
   Depends on your needs...            01/01/70 00:00      

Back to Subject List