Search found 99 matches
- Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:58 pm
- Forum: Serial Communication
- Topic: interrupts with UARTs
- Replies: 12
- Views: 32641
Re: interrupts with UARTs
Obviously, something's different in our two compilers. I get a compiler error when I add that line: print "UART1 LCR", hex (*4001000C) -ERROR tray_test_rs232_loopback.bas: 35: Expected End Of Line, found C) print "UART1 LCR", hex (*4001000C) -First ERROR at line :35 Is that a clue? Have I left out a...
- Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:44 pm
- Forum: Serial Communication
- Topic: interrupts with UARTs
- Replies: 12
- Views: 32641
Re: interrupts with UARTs
Thanks: I'm running on the PC from which I program: ARMbasic[8.27d], BASICtools[5.19] On the SuperPro board, ARMbasic kernal 8.25 with floating point. First, I've tried this at even as slow as 110 baud. Second, I know my custom terminal on a hardware port (no dongles) will keep up with 115200 with N...
- Thu Sep 19, 2013 11:31 pm
- Forum: Serial Communication
- Topic: interrupts with UARTs
- Replies: 12
- Views: 32641
Re: interrupts with UARTs
I have three SuperPro boards running Basic 8.25. I cannot make them run TXD(1) on a buffered basis. If I wait() between characters, I can get the whole message out, but if I 'slam' the 'buffer' at the max loop rate with your example given in the BasicTools help, it loses all but the first character,...
- Thu Sep 19, 2013 11:20 pm
- Forum: Serial Communication
- Topic: TXD timing issues
- Replies: 3
- Views: 11253
Re: TXD timing issues
I'm using SuperPros at Basic V8.25. I, also, find the BASIC TXD(1) has only a one-character buffer; as of today 9/19/13. I can make it work with wait delays between characters, but overrun the one-character buffer instantly if I slam more into it faster. No, my terminal watching it cannot be overrun...
- Mon Apr 15, 2013 6:01 pm
- Forum: Software issues
- Topic: expression evaluation
- Replies: 7
- Views: 14121
Re: expression evaluation
Nice. I didn't crash the plane.
I must say, this is a pretty easy environment to work in. I not what you'd call a 'programmer' (at all, I'm an explosives consultant)
but the math routines just 'fell into place' with only the tiniest bit of head-scratching.
'Good stuff. I think I'm hooked!
LS
I must say, this is a pretty easy environment to work in. I not what you'd call a 'programmer' (at all, I'm an explosives consultant)
but the math routines just 'fell into place' with only the tiniest bit of head-scratching.
'Good stuff. I think I'm hooked!
LS
- Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:08 pm
- Forum: Software issues
- Topic: expression evaluation
- Replies: 7
- Views: 14121
Re: expression evaluation
Thanks much!
I shall now take a test-flight!
LS
I shall now take a test-flight!
LS
- Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:16 pm
- Forum: Software issues
- Topic: expression evaluation
- Replies: 7
- Views: 14121
Re: expression evaluation
Yes, thanks. I got past that. From reading the docs (now), I presume that if I wish to use higher math functions like (say) trig [j=SIN(x)], that I must either write a fp routine to calculate it, drive it from a stored table, or must switch to the C compiler? Are there some BASIC libraries with more...
- Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:00 pm
- Forum: Software issues
- Topic: expression evaluation
- Replies: 7
- Views: 14121
Re: expression evaluation
duh... never mind.
I got it working once I declared the variables as SINGLEs
Thanks,
LS
I got it working once I declared the variables as SINGLEs
Thanks,
LS
- Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:54 pm
- Forum: Software issues
- Topic: expression evaluation
- Replies: 7
- Views: 14121
Re: expression evaluation
Ok... tried that, and got the expected result, but when I tried it with variables instead of literals, no soap.
ie.
j=1.0
for i=1.0 to 20.0
print j/3.14159
next i
Thanks,
LS
ie.
j=1.0
for i=1.0 to 20.0
print j/3.14159
next i
Thanks,
LS