| ??? 06/11/01 22:13 Read: times |
#12396 - RE: Peters post here |
Peter, you bring up a point that is often overlooked; by using several small uCs instead of a big horse, you get code that is modular and MAINTAINABLE. Often in a "big horse product" if you have to change a detail the whole house of cards fall, if you have each subfunction encapsulated in its own micro, there is no ripple effect.
Have fun, go modular Erik |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Cygnal Vs. other product | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Cygnal Vs. other product | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Cygnal Vs. other product | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Cygnal Vs. other product | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Cygnal Vs. other product | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Cygnal Vs. other product | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Cygnal Vs. other product | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Cygnal Vs. other product | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Cygnal Vs. other product | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Cygnal Vs. other product | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Cygnal Vs. other product | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Peters post here | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Cygnal Vs. other product | 01/01/70 00:00 |



