Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
???
06/11/12 17:55
Read: times


 
#187668 - You have already been given suggestions
Responding to: ???'s previous message
Mandeep Singh said:
[...] other saying remove the delays

Where have you seen anyone saying you should remove the delay?

You got information about how to perform debugging, even without a digital oscilloscope. And one of the things mentioned in that post was how to verify that your delay actually produces a reasonable delay. That is not (!!!) the same as saying that you should remove the delay.

And you was told that busy-loop delays have big issues since they depend much on the compiler. So some compilers will generate faster code. Some will generate slower code. And some compilers will optimize away the delay completely.

anyways, the real problem is of timing only...and i don't have oscilloscope

So - was was your reaction when I did post specifically how to test the delays in a way that didn't require an oscilloscope? Have you spent any time testing the suggested method yet?

so whats your suggestion...??

The same as before - right now, we are waiting for feedback from you based on already given suggestions...

By the way "...??" is five characters. Proper use is one or three terminating characters. ".", "!", "?", "...", "!!!", "???" or in some situations a mixture like "??!"


List of 20 messages in thread
TopicAuthorDate
help me with 93c46 and at89s52---MikroC            01/01/70 00:00      
   What You Need to Do Yourself            01/01/70 00:00      
      need help - 93c46 using AT89s52 - mikroc            01/01/70 00:00      
         MikroC is unwise choice            01/01/70 00:00      
   help me with 93c46 and at89s52---MikroC            01/01/70 00:00      
      So check without scope - adjust code until testable            01/01/70 00:00      
         you have now 3 times asked help with 93c46/at89s52--MikroC            01/01/70 00:00      
            93c46/at89s52--MikroC            01/01/70 00:00      
               my suggestion            01/01/70 00:00      
               You have already been given suggestions            01/01/70 00:00      
                  help me with 93c46 and at89s52---MikroC            01/01/70 00:00      
                     Use a proper Compiler            01/01/70 00:00      
                        I wanna, I wanna, I wanna,            01/01/70 00:00      
                     Time to actually prove your logic and your delays            01/01/70 00:00      
                        ----thanks all for helping out            01/01/70 00:00      
                           do you REALLY expect ....            01/01/70 00:00      
                     If you can't get MikroC to work ...            01/01/70 00:00      
                        switching to keil            01/01/70 00:00      
                           Example code on this website            01/01/70 00:00      
                           why, oh why            01/01/70 00:00      

Back to Subject List