??? 08/12/11 09:05 Read: times |
#183319 - KISS Responding to: ???'s previous message |
I'm all in favour of KISS. The 37 command bytes are more less arbitrarily chosen, so recoding them with a greater hamming distance is the simplest solution I can think of. Sending 2 bytes actually requires more complicated code, although it's obviously still relatively simple.
The goal is to maximise robustness in an industrial environment where ESD and fast transients might cause bit errors. As we don't know the BER, we are just looking for generic ruggedness without added cost. |
Topic | Author | Date |
Error detecting codes over RS232 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: increase the error detection capability | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
How complex? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Hamming distance | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Hamming distance really not a good choice | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
KISS | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Transfer size? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Transfer Size --- | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Parameter free | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Transfer Size --- | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
double command and CR | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
a bit more involved and better | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Double Characters... | 01/01/70 00:00 |