??? 01/17/07 14:24 Read: times |
#130966 - 2. Responding to: ???'s previous message |
The FAQ, among other things, said:
2. Use a derivative which has the needed number of pins If you choose this option, start your selection here: http://www.keil.com/dd/search_parm.asp |
Topic | Author | Date |
MCS-51 I/O PORT EXPANDER | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
read the FAQ | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
2. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
beware | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
hard? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Maybe, but... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Could be a place for ... take a deep breath ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Richard, please,... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Have you noticed the loss of the O/P? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Give him a chance... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
It\\\'s come up before ... perhaps it\\\'s homework | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Don't you mean... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
well, yes, but if one works ... more will, too | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
go for SILabs | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
maybe a bit more information is needed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Use I/O expander | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
This suggestion, while good, is entirely premature | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
if very high speed is no concern go for IIC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Do you notice that we've lost the O/P? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I don't think so | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
That would explain the nomenclature![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 |