| Author |
Message |
|
|
 Posted: Jan 07, 2010 - 10:29 PM |
|
Joined: Jun 13, 2008
Posts: 2
|
|
Hi to all.
I want to ask if it is possible to run program for atmega8515 on atmega8.
It is from site http://www.swinkels.tvtom.pl/swinsid/
in download section - version SE
there is an source code and schematic.
IS it possible to compile that code for atmega8? and will it be pin compatibile?
Can somebody do it for me? 
Thanks for the answers. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 07, 2010 - 10:33 PM |
|
Joined: Mar 28, 2001
Posts: 20339
Location: Sydney, Australia (Gum trees, Koalas and Kangaroos, No Edelweiss)
|
|
|
Quote:
it is possible to run program for atmega8515 on atmega8.
Mostly with some small changes.
Quote:
Can somebody do it for me?
No problems, just pm me and I'll give you a price. Paypal payment will be ok. |
_________________
John Samperi
Ampertronics Pty. Ltd.
www.ampertronics.com.au
* Electronic Design * Custom Products * Contract Assembly
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 07, 2010 - 10:36 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 17, 2004
Posts: 13820
Location: Vancouver, BC
|
|
All AVRs have the same (or nearly the same) core, so much of the code would work. But there are differences in peripherals. Some cases would require minor changes in code, some majors changes, and some may be impossible due to the fact that a peripheral may not exists at all on the model you want to port to. In any case, the mega8515 and mega8 are not pin compatible. The don't even have the same number of pins.
Is there a particular reason that you want to use the mega8? |
_________________
Regards,
Steve A.
The Board helps those that help themselves.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 07, 2010 - 10:42 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 02, 2009
Posts: 3239
Location: Zelenograd, Russia
|
|
It IS possible to rearrange the pinout, modify the code and reassemble it for Mega8.
It is NOT possible to assemble and run this code directly on Mega8 without the said modifications. |
_________________
Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 12:27 PM |
|
Joined: Jun 13, 2008
Posts: 2
|
|
I want to use atmega8 because I own few from previous project. Even if buy they are cheaper.
But
It looks like lot of work, better buy 8515 and build that dual version I think that would be probably better.
Thanks for the replies. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 12:53 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 02, 2009
Posts: 3239
Location: Zelenograd, Russia
|
|
| Adapting this code for Mega8 would take just 10 minutes for a knowledgeable engineer. |
_________________
Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 04:05 PM |
|
Joined: Dec 29, 2009
Posts: 160
Location: ny,ny
|
|
| 9 out of 10 of my 8515 binary images run on a m8 and versa visa. This is one of the biggest reasons for bit banging instead of showing off with unique processor features. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 04:21 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 02, 2009
Posts: 3239
Location: Zelenograd, Russia
|
|
Look at the OP's schematics and see this is not the case.
BTW, how were the hats - tasty? All 16?  |
_________________
Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 04:55 PM |
|
Joined: Dec 29, 2009
Posts: 160
Location: ny,ny
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 05:22 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 02, 2009
Posts: 3239
Location: Zelenograd, Russia
|
|
So you didn't like the hats - it's as expected. Since you also didn't like to take a challenge other than writing a zero length program, I'm completely satisfied.
The last thing I have to tell to save you from being mocked: during last several years I have ported about a dozen of my commercial projects from Mega's to PIC24's/dsPIC's (assembly to assembly). Comparisons and testings indicated the resulting PIC24/dsPIC code size became 10%..20% less in BYTE size (despite the PIC24/dsPIC has a 24 bit wide code memory vs 16 bit in AVR) and 6..10 times faster than original AVR code.
Be well then |
_________________
Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 05:45 PM |
|
Joined: Jul 18, 2005
Posts: 62241
Location: (using avr-gcc in) Finchingfield, Essex, England
|
|
| A PIC vs AVR war? Great! Let's see .... we haven't had one of those since at least... |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 05:52 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 02, 2009
Posts: 3239
Location: Zelenograd, Russia
|
|
| No, nothing like this - each family has its niche, advantages and drawbacks. I'm just informing one proud and generous hat eater of the real things |
_________________
Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 06:19 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 17, 2004
Posts: 13820
Location: Vancouver, BC
|
|
|
Quote:
I'm just informing one proud and generous hat eater of the real things
A) It has nothing to do with this thread.
B) We don't give a s*#&.
So, take it somewhere else. |
_________________
Regards,
Steve A.
The Board helps those that help themselves.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 08:49 PM |
|
Joined: Dec 29, 2009
Posts: 160
Location: ny,ny
|
|
|
at 12:45pm clawson wrote:
A PIC vs AVR war? Great! Let's see .... we haven't had one of those since at least...
12:32 pm.
Nyaa nyaaa... pixie can't even wiggle a bit with smaller program than AVR guy. Or even same size. Well what should we expect from archirecture designed before most here were born? Nyaaa nyaaaa... 
Hey... MBedder... maybe try 8051. or 8008. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 09:00 PM |
|
Joined: Mar 28, 2001
Posts: 20339
Location: Sydney, Australia (Gum trees, Koalas and Kangaroos, No Edelweiss)
|
|
|
Quote:
9 out of 10 of my 8515 binary images run on a m8 and versa visa.
..even if the pins or ports are not there. Amazing! |
_________________
John Samperi
Ampertronics Pty. Ltd.
www.ampertronics.com.au
* Electronic Design * Custom Products * Contract Assembly
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 09:10 PM |
|
Joined: Dec 29, 2009
Posts: 160
Location: ny,ny
|
|
|
js wrote:
Quote:
9 out of 10 of my 8515 binary images run on a m8 and versa visa.
..even if the pins or ports are not there. Amazing!
Well... that's why it's not 10 out of 10. But you are right, I am amazing. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 09:12 PM |
|
Joined: Feb 19, 2001
Posts: 25891
Location: Wisconsin USA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 09:25 PM |
|
Joined: Dec 29, 2009
Posts: 160
Location: ny,ny
|
|
|
theusch wrote:
And vector tables? Who needs newfangled interrupts?
Not me if I can help it. INTs r 4 losers.
Quote:
Unfortunately it's impossible to generate a proper RC PWM signal with AVR OC
I should have said USEABLE servo signals. Your method doesn't work for the RC guys because they can't sacrifice channels.
You did good though. Much better at that stuff than me. As everybody knows I hate spec sheets. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 09:29 PM |
|
Joined: Aug 13, 2006
Posts: 6696
Location: Bellingham, WA - USA
|
|
|
Quote:
As everybody knows I
We're all following you like a soap opera. |
_________________
Chuck Baird
"It's better to catch the trapeze than test the safety net" -- RPi book
http://www.cbaird.org
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 09:31 PM |
|
Joined: Mar 28, 2001
Posts: 20339
Location: Sydney, Australia (Gum trees, Koalas and Kangaroos, No Edelweiss)
|
|
More like a HORROR movie. I hope none of the stuff he has "designed" is used to save or preserve people's lives.  |
_________________
John Samperi
Ampertronics Pty. Ltd.
www.ampertronics.com.au
* Electronic Design * Custom Products * Contract Assembly
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 10:12 PM |
|
Joined: Dec 29, 2009
Posts: 160
Location: ny,ny
|
|
|
js wrote:
More like a HORROR movie. I hope none of the stuff he has "designed" is used to save or preserve people's lives.
FYI interrupts are not the path to truly deterministic code. And let's not talk about debugging, code verification, or portability.
You have my permission to sprinkle them EVERWHERE yourself. INTs r 4 U! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 10:44 PM |
|
Joined: Aug 13, 2006
Posts: 6696
Location: Bellingham, WA - USA
|
|
| Out of curiosity, why is "truly deterministic" code necessarily an appropriate response of an interactive system responding to external stimuli? |
_________________
Chuck Baird
"It's better to catch the trapeze than test the safety net" -- RPi book
http://www.cbaird.org
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 - 11:32 PM |
|
Joined: Jan 26, 2009
Posts: 534
Location: Thessaloniki Greece
|
|
| First check the interrupt vector table between two micros,the stack pointer,peripheral registers and port registers.And everything can be tested and compiled in Avrstudio. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 01:23 AM |
|
Joined: Nov 02, 2009
Posts: 3239
Location: Zelenograd, Russia
|
|
Just in case somebody is interested in a 8-bit (256 steps) multi-channel software PWM implementation, I'm pleased to share my code written several years ago.
It takes slightly more than 2 CPU clocks per channel and is usable in a wide range of applications. With 100% 16 MIPS CPU load it generates over 2 KHz 8-bit 8-channel PWM or 500 Hz 8-bit 8-channel PWM with only 25% CPU load:
Code:
;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
;
; 8 channel interrupt driven 8-bit (256 steps) software PWM implementation example.
; r3..r10 hold channel duty cycle values
; PORTB pins are PWM channels' outputs (port can be redefined via PWMPORT alias)
.include "tn2313def.inc"
.def STSAV = r2 ; SREG holding register for all non-nested interrupts
.def pwm = r15 ; PWM digital sawtooth generator used in Timer 1 ISR
.def tmp = r16 ; General purpose temporary register
.def inttmp = r25 ; Common temporary register for all non-nested interrupts
.equ pwmport = PORTB ; PWM output port
.equ fosc = 16000000 ; CPU clock frequency, Hz
.equ fpwm = 2000 ; Desired PWM frequency, Hz (2050 Hz max @16 MIPS)
.set t1val = fosc/fpwm/256-1 ; Timer 1 TOP reload value for given FPWM and FOSC
.if (t1val < 30) ; Timer 1 ISR takes up to 30 clocks to execute
.warning "Selected PWM frequency is too high, forcing highest available (full CPU usage!)"
.set t1val = 30
.endif
.cseg
;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
; Interrupt vectors:
rjmp reset
.org OC1Aaddr
rjmp OC1Aisr
;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
reset:
ldi tmp,low(RAMEND)
out SPL,tmp ; Stack pointer initialization
.ifdef SPH
ldi tmp,high(RAMEND)
out SPH,tmp
.endif
ldi tmp,0xFF ; Set up PB0..7 as outputs
out DDRB,tmp
ldi tmp,32*1 ; Initialize r3..r10 (PWM channel values)
mov r3,tmp ;
ldi tmp,32*2 ;
mov r4,tmp ;
ldi tmp,32*3 ;
mov r5,tmp ;
ldi tmp,32*4 ;
mov r6,tmp ;
ldi tmp,32*5 ;
mov r7,tmp ;
ldi tmp,32*6 ;
mov r8,tmp ;
ldi tmp,32*7 ;
mov r9,tmp ;
ldi tmp,32*8-2 ;
mov r10,tmp ;
rcall init_timer1 ; Set up Timer 1
sei ; Enable interrupts
rjmp PC ; Loop forever
;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
; Timer 1 initialization (Clear Timer on Compare match - CTC mode).
; Timer 1 runs at Fosc in CTC mode with overlow rate derived from a desired PWM frequency.
init_timer1:
ldi tmp,high(t1val) ; Initialize TOP register (OCR1A) and Timer 1:
out OCR1AH,tmp ; High byte first
out TCNT1H,tmp ; Reset Timer 1 to get correct 1st result
ldi tmp,low(t1val) ;
out OCR1AL,tmp ; Low byte last
out TCNT1L,tmp ;
ldi tmp,(1<<WGM12)|(1<<CS10) ; CTC mode, T1CLK = Fosc
out TCCR1B,tmp ;
in tmp,TIMSK ; Enable OC1A interrupts
sbr tmp,1<<OCIE1A ;
out TIMSK,tmp ;
ret
;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
; Timer1 (CTC mode) compare match ISR - single 8-bit software PWM step.
; 24 clocks, 21 program words
OC1Aisr:
in stsav,SREG ; Save SREG to STSAV reserved register
inc pwm ; Advance PWM sawtooth generator
cp r3,pwm ; CARRY = 1 if Rx <= PWM - 2 clocks per PWM channel
rol inttmp ; Shift in the CARRY to an INTTMP
cp r4,pwm ; CARRY = 1 if Rx <= PWM - 2 clocks per PWM channel
rol inttmp ; Shift in the CARRY to an INTTMP
cp r5,pwm ; CARRY = 1 if Rx <= PWM - 2 clocks per PWM channel
rol inttmp ; Shift in the CARRY to an INTTMP
cp r6,pwm ; CARRY = 1 if Rx <= PWM - 2 clocks per PWM channel
rol inttmp ; Shift in the CARRY to an INTTMP
cp r7,pwm ; CARRY = 1 if Rx <= PWM - 2 clocks per PWM channel
rol inttmp ; Shift in the CARRY to an INTTMP
cp r8,pwm ; CARRY = 1 if Rx <= PWM - 2 clocks per PWM channel
rol inttmp ; Shift in the CARRY to an INTTMP
cp r9,pwm ; CARRY = 1 if Rx <= PWM - 2 clocks per PWM channel
rol inttmp ; Shift in the CARRY to an INTTMP
cp r10,pwm ; CARRY = 1 if Rx <= PWM - 2 clocks per PWM channel
rol inttmp ; Shift in the CARRY to an INTTMP
out pwmport,inttmp ; Set PWM 1..8 pins to new states
out SREG,stsav ; Restore SREG from STSAV reserved register
reti
;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Last edited by MBedder on Jan 09, 2010 - 08:41 AM; edited 1 time in total
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 01:36 AM |
|
Joined: Aug 13, 2006
Posts: 6696
Location: Bellingham, WA - USA
|
|
| No stack initialization? |
_________________
Chuck Baird
"It's better to catch the trapeze than test the safety net" -- RPi book
http://www.cbaird.org
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 01:53 AM |
|
Joined: Nov 02, 2009
Posts: 3239
Location: Zelenograd, Russia
|
|
| Exactly. Guess why |
_________________
Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 03:32 AM |
|
Joined: Nov 17, 2004
Posts: 13820
Location: Vancouver, BC
|
|
|
Quote:
Exactly. Guess why
Because you want the program to fail at the first RCALL? |
_________________
Regards,
Steve A.
The Board helps those that help themselves.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 08:44 AM |
|
Joined: Nov 02, 2009
Posts: 3239
Location: Zelenograd, Russia
|
|
| No, just due to a copy/paste mistake. BTW, for this particular code and device this was not necessary - guess why |
_________________
Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 02:57 PM |
|
Joined: Feb 19, 2001
Posts: 25891
Location: Wisconsin USA
|
|
Without looking it up, Tiny2313 probably has SP at RAMEND at reset anyway.
Again without looking it up, this sounds a lot like the Atmel app note on "multiple PWMs" or something like that.
With only one interrupt source enabled, an app like that would have little jitter and it wouldn't be accumulative as noted in the Atmel app note.
I guess if jitter was a problem in, say, a multi-channel hobby servo the "secondary" data channels such as UART or trigger I/Os or heartbeat timers could be polled.
Lee |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 03:03 PM |
|
Joined: Dec 29, 2009
Posts: 160
Location: ny,ny
|
|
|
zbaird wrote:
Out of curiosity, why is "truly deterministic" code necessarily an appropriate response of an interactive system responding to external stimuli?
Mostly for runtime validation and testing. It get's particularly bad when multiple ints are involved. You can get high reliabilty figures but never quite reach 100% unlike deterministic code which can. And then there are the development issues (debugging) which become orders of magnitude more difficult with interrupts.
They are somtimes necessary but are hugely over-used, specially by inexperienced designers who like to show off instead of get the job done. Kinda like with processor specific peripherals. You know, the guys that use a timer to blink an LED. :rolleyes: |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 04:08 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 02, 2009
Posts: 3239
Location: Zelenograd, Russia
|
|
|
theusch wrote:
Without looking it up, Tiny2313 probably has SP at RAMEND at reset anyway.
Nope - its at 0x00 at reset.
The answer is simple - since my code is less than 256 words long and doesn't use nested calls/pushes, a single level 8-bit stack location is enough. This location (0x00) is mapped to an R0 register which is not used anywhere else in my code.
When a call or interrupt occurs the caller's PCL is saved to R0, then SP gets underflown to 0xFF and the caller's PCH is attempted to be saved to an unimplemented RAM location which simply does not perform any action. At RET/RETI the caller's PCH gets read from the said unimplemented location which yields to a 0x00 value. Then SP gets incremented pointing to R0 so the caller's PCL as well the entire PC gets properly restored.
Quote:
Again without looking it up, this sounds a lot like the Atmel app note on "multiple PWMs" or something like that.
I've never read that appnote. My code was written to demonstrate the AVR advantages over PIC18 in one of the numerous AVR vs PIC holy wars on one of the Russian technical forums.
The opponents tried to prove that the PIC18 code takes 2 instruction per PWM channel (taking advantage of PIC's DECFSZ instruction missing in AVR) whereas AVR code takes 3. I (aka AVR that times ) realized how to do it in two AVR instruction per channel and proposed this 24-channel PWM code which accumulates the channel/sawtooth comparison results in a register and then outputs the whole 8-bit value to a port. The opponents had fled from the battlefield in shame and fear, and the AVR was completely avenged and acquitted
P.S. Sorry, the URLs above are in Russian. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 05:16 PM |
|
Joined: Dec 29, 2009
Posts: 160
Location: ny,ny
|
|
|
MBedder wrote:
theusch wrote:
Without looking it up, Tiny2313 probably has SP at RAMEND at reset anyway.
Nope - its at 0x00 at reset.
Quote:
SP7 SP6 SP5 SP4 SP3 SP2 SP1 SP0 SPL
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
Read/Write R/W R/W R/W R/W R/W R/W R/W R/W
Initial Value 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
Theusch apparently "bedder" at AVR than PICboy.
PS Generating legal servo siganls IS one of the few areas PIC has it over AVR. That and external access to op amp. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 05:37 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 02, 2009
Posts: 3239
Location: Zelenograd, Russia
|
|
| 17th hat to eat - shouldn't be that easy, cowboy |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 06:39 PM |
|
Joined: Dec 29, 2009
Posts: 160
Location: ny,ny
|
|
|
MBedder wrote:
Sorry. I had tiny13.
As far as hats you seem unable to differentiate between changing a port and changing a bit but also appear to think you can turn on an LED with 0 lines of code. To reiterate, you were suckered from the start when I challenged you to write a smaller program than my one liner.
Keep ignoring these simple realities as it's very entertaining. Again and again. I certainly never get tired of pointing this out. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 06:51 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 02, 2009
Posts: 3239
Location: Zelenograd, Russia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 06:53 PM |
|
Joined: Dec 29, 2009
Posts: 160
Location: ny,ny
|
|
| LOL! You sound like you're upset. Are you upset? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 07:00 PM |
|
Joined: Nov 02, 2009
Posts: 3239
Location: Zelenograd, Russia
|
|
| Huh? Me?? How could I get upset with a boyscout hat eater who does not wear glasses and thinks that everything in this world was done with a Photoshop??? C'mon, cowboy - I already got tired to LOL |
_________________
Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 07:16 PM |
|
Joined: Dec 29, 2009
Posts: 160
Location: ny,ny
|
|
Uh oh... I think he's upset. He's definitely upset.
And apparently read my post before discoveing the error. Welp... at least SOME of us are able to admit we made a mistake.
BTW I only said I'd eat ONE hat if you could turn on an LED with a PIC using less than one line of code. And never mentioned hats on the SPL deal. Not too good at math, are we? 0, 1, 16, 17, 18?
LOL! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2010 - 09:12 PM |
|
Joined: Feb 19, 2001
Posts: 25891
Location: Wisconsin USA
|
|
|
Quote:
The opponents had fled from the battlefield in shame and fear, and the AVR was completely avenged and acquitted
In all the Holy Wars, it must be remembered that a specific "trick" only matters in the edge-condition situations. In general, micros aren't totally full and are loafing.
E.g., your stack trick above--who cares if the micro is 2% full or 3% full, or if it takes a microsecond longer to complete startup?
Quote:
I've never read that appnote.
AVR136: Low-jitter Multi-channel Software PWM
http://www.atmel.com/dyn/resources/prod ... oc8020.pdf |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 10, 2010 - 09:24 AM |
|
Joined: Nov 02, 2009
Posts: 3239
Location: Zelenograd, Russia
|
|
As I stated above, it was not a trick but just a copy/paste error. But since I tested that the code is working before posting it here, I wondered why, so I analyzed the details and posted my explanation above.
Thanks for the link. BTW according to its code it works 8 times slower than my code. |
_________________
Warning: Grumpy Old Chuff. Reading this post may severely damage your mental health.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Jan 10, 2010 - 02:33 PM |
|
Joined: Feb 19, 2001
Posts: 25891
Location: Wisconsin USA
|
|
|
Quote:
it works 8 times slower than my code.
Well, yaahhhh--it was not written by a 'Freak, but rather by "an Atmel
certified Field Applications Engineer".
(And app notes may never be the fastEST or tightEST--there is something to be said for making them as straightforward and practical as possible so that many levels can understand them.)
Lee |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Maximize
RSS
