| switchover from 8048 to 8031 | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| P4-P7 whereabouts | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| This might be a bit trickier than you think ... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| interfacing 8243 to uprocessor | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Replacing one dinosaur with another? | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Maybe you should reconsider the system configuration | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| 8048 -> 8051 | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| if you buy a SILabs kit ... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Beware of 'C'-only systems ... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Pardon??! | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| I have to believe their tech support guys ... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| The SILabs 'tools' are KEIL | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| My point, exactly! | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| WHO states that he has to use Keil | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| There's probably good reason for that! | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| the KEY word | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| You can't evaluate with something that's not complete | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| But they obviously can't give away the complete product | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| migration of 8243 expender | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| what specifically does not work? | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Of course not! | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Agree with you there! | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| On the subject of cars ... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| When I feel like it | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| male cow manure | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| The tools SiLabs wants you to use ... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| the old familar tune and singing it off key | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Lots of C code to fill 2kB or 4kB | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| and how will that help the O/P? | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| maybe if the lines are.... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Don't you worry | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| It was a kind of joke. | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Illustrated here | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| 2K of binaries for just a few dozen lines of 'C' | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| perhaps, but the O/P didn't say he wants to use 'C' | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| You were the one who raised it! | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| True enough, but ... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| read the Keil manual | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| I don't believe that's the case | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Yes, it was definitely you. | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Emulation possible | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| why not emulate 8048 in 8051 | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Interesting idea, but ... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| how to 8243 | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| It could be quite straightforward | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| it could be.... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| how to 8243 | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| You really should open a museum! | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| You really..... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| conv51 | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Yep ... you're right ... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| SiLabs parts | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| It's not at all clear what the problem is | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| I know that you live in the past | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| it's all about the timing ... and the support | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| If it matters, then you shouldn't be asking | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| living in the past, you would not know of ... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| quality of support | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| "Most coders" | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| do you really have any evidence | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| You clearly haven't though about it! | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| which is the correct procedure | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Not so ridiculous ... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| when I discuss a, you invariably bring up b | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| assembler code | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| C and assembler are complements | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| That's meaningless, Richard | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| It's not pointless, Andy | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| 2kB of code space is quite a lot for evaluation | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| One could answer this in a number of ways ... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| I think I know why Richard keeps arguing against C ... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| In that case, where's the benefit? | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| It is unclear... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| 8048 to 8051 migration | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| 240 i/o pins is an awful lot | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Many alternatives | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| I doubt he's using 240 I/O pins | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| 240 pins i/o | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Have you considered Programmable Logic? | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| What will you do when those i8243's are exhausted? | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| old 8243 equipment | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| It's entirely up to you | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Max 8 addresses on I2C? | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| wouldn't it be wise to start thinking about this right now? | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| wouldn't it be wise... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| I2C configuration for 240 I/Os | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| PCA9501 | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Decentalized options ? | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| I would definitely look at multiple controllers | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| max 8 adresses... | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| SPI often cheap compared to I2C | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| not necessarily true | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| not nessesarily true | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| WHY? | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| 51 derivative | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| IIC chips | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| cheaper | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| cheaper | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| FAQ | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| shift register | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| re: Max 8 I2C addresses | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
two options | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| NXP has a line of "bus splitters" | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Still unclear [edited] | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| 8048 to 8051 migration | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| AT89S8253 | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| AT89S8253 | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| Sorry... duplicated post!! | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
| 8048 vs 89S52 DIP40 may fit but different pinout | | 01/01/70 00:00 |
