| ??? 02/20/08 17:50 Read: times |
#151219 - If you used _at_ instead of XBYTE .... Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Brett Wallace said:
UIP = XBYTE[10] & 0x80; // Initialize UIP while (UIP) // Wait until UIP MSB is cleared UIP = XBYTE[10] & 0x80; // Read MSB of XBYTE[10] into UIP If you used _at_ instead of XBYTE, it could become: volatile xdata char uip _at_ 10; // Are you sure that shouldn't be 0x10 ? while( uip & 0x80 ); |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Real Time Clock and other | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| How to post source code | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| post- source code | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| internal XRAM? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| its not logical but | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| modified code using UIF | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| re | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| UIP | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Will get stuck | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| If you used _at_ instead of XBYTE .... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Comments | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| reply to coments | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| _at_ instead of XBYTE | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| pin assignments | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You still haven't answered the questions! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| xdata i/o | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| just do it | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Default | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sorry i can't reply due to my ill health | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| address | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| perfect!! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| try to understand | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
yes i finally got the point | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Aside: Not a macro | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Delay? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| agree | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Keil know | 01/01/70 00:00 |