| ??? 02/10/07 19:18 Modified: 02/10/07 19:19 Read: times |
#132469 - syntax error Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Joseph, I'm not one to bother most folks (Erik's an exception) with this sort of thing, but you've hit on a pet peeve of mine ...
You said, insure where I suspect you meant ensure. Insure means to indemnify, while ensure means to secure. In the former case, it suggests you'll do nothing to avoid the failure, but will pay for the consequences when it occurs. I doubt that's your goal. O.K. ... O.K. I'm off my soapbox now ... RE |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Maximum Reliable UART Baud Rates for 805x | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The UART in any chip with a T2 can run at F | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Thanks guys. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not quite | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| syntax error | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Point taken | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| welcome to the club | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Some club ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| they just were too square :) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Mmmh, yeah, well ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not necessarily | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Polling | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not only this... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Scheme | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| isn't it the same? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| polling all the way | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Wrong question? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| define maximum rate... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| semantics | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| for the standard '51/'52... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| HUH | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| PC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| non-standard | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why comes in UART on PC and 232 buffer? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sorry | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Good note | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| OK I take back | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| CP210x USB-UART | 01/01/70 00:00 |