ME Labs getting Lazy?

Honestly, I'm not trying to start a war or debate, however I've used Pic Basic and Pic Basic Pro for many years off and on and always loved it. Especially with the MicroCode IDE.

I bought the compiler mainly so I could get right down to business and write code and knock out projects quickly and it has always done that, until now.

Now, it seems like everytime I turn around, there are work arounds or limits or lack of support as far as the library and still no parameter support.

For Instance,
A lot of other compilers have built in modbus, CAN, and LIN support. Things that a lot of folks use everyday. In PicBasic Pro I was forced to write all this from scratch. No problem, I can, and I did but it has me wondering if that is something I really need to be spending my time on.

When it came to CAN, ME Labs said there was no standard so therefore they had no plans to support it. That was an easy way to just avoid it. There is indeed a standard for CAN messages, and besides, you only need the functions to send out data and to get data, no decode the message contents.

Anyways, I started playing with 18F devices and I get PM doesn't support these devices and I have to use MPASM. Ok, cool, but now all the defines are different, and the tracking down compiler errors is not easy, at least for me. So I spend the time to gid thru the include files trying to determine how to setup the fuses properly. More time spent that should not be required!

Now MPASM gives me some crazy error and then I have to dig thru the mac file and it's all greek to me. I don't plan on learning ASM or do I plan on digging thru mac files. I still have no idea what the error is. It provides a line number but still no clue.

Is it me, or have these guys just taken a back seat, Continue to support some new devices when they came out and just collect money from what crowd they have left?

I'm a little hot under the collar right now, but this sure seems like a kludge if I ever seen one. Are all the 18F and future devices going to be handled the same way?

Fire away, surely I'm not the only person that feels this way am I?

1. I have always gotten very fast and accurate tech support when I've called MELabs. I'd even spend the little money to call overseas if I knew I'd get the phone support that good.

2. PBP is a Basic Stamp alternative, and little more. It is totally optimized for ease of use and foolproof code, not power, speed or efficiency.

3. You need to read your data sheets on how to set up your fuses.

I have never used PM--started with MPASM from the beginning--so I do not know what your issues are. Perhaps you could post some and some folks can offer suggestions.

Why not try the free version of Swordfish for your 18F project? I hear it is great, but only for 18F Pics. Proton compiler is also pretty good, and they have recently made updates.

No, MeLabs isn’t getting lazy. People are getting lazy. Folks want more for less – it's understandable. They want a single easy instruction for everything from pulling out a single byte from a variable length GPS Data string through to wiping their arse whilst using the least amount of bog-roll (olde-English verbage).

Features that Person-A wants, isn't what Person-B wants. Each of us wants our personal favourite things to make our lives easier. Those that are capable, like you have with CAN, have gone away and done it, those that can't moan about lack of features.

Look what's happening already... people can't use the features they've got. They haven't a clue. They live for Cut and Paste from example code without a blindest idea of what they are doing, and then moan when it doesn't work. Despite the best efforts of others to teach, in the majority it falls on deaf ears. The last week just as an example has seen so many questions that could be answered by searching the forum, reading the manual or looking at the Datasheet.

Craps, if there was a forum for screwdrivers, people will be posting equivalent questions of "I’ve got one with a funny star-shaped end, and my screw has a slot, how can I get it to fit?" That is exactly what is happening here. We are now at a stage where people that don't know the first thing about electronics, components or programming, are trying to build complex projects. So why does the compiler error when somebody tries to use ADCIN on a 16F84? Well the obvious answer is "You’ve got an old version of the Compiler so it's time you upgraded" – geeze, I was really tempted to post that answer! Have we really all descended to this level?

I'm NOT MeLabs, I’ve absolutely nothing to do with them other than we share the first four letters of our name. But if I was, I'd answer something along the lines of "We provide you with a tool that works, that contains a certain set of features, if that tool doesn’t suit your purpose, then there are others that might". You buy a standard, tried and tested, reliable and solid family car from Toyota and you want to go rallying. You can (a) ask Toyota to sell you something to fit your purpose (which if you put enough money down on the table they'll be more than happy to do), or (b) you can customise and tune it up yourself (if you have the skill-set)... or (c) you buy a different car. Actually, there's also option (d) which is to bitch and moan but that's just totally unproductive as it doesn't get you anywhere.

With regard to the Compiler... option (a) throw money at MeLabs, I'm sure for the right price they'll design-in anything you want. This forum proves that option (b) works. Option (c) is however the easiest.

Melanie,
I agree with you and like I said, for the most part I've just built what I needed. The datasheets can be pretty confusing and you can't expect everyone in the world to understand them, without some help and practice.

Back on the compiler. I guess my biggest fustration was that the Chipset Defines are all broken, and I have to comment out the defines in the Picbasic Inc File then go dig thru the P18Fxxxx.inc file and do all these work arounds.

WHY? I can see this being an issue with maybe an outdated compiler package because things changed but it this still all required for the newer versions or is it something we will always have to live with?

How do other vendors do it. Back to the company x and company z don't require you to do this....

No, I have to agree with you in part, but I can see where MeLabs is comming from...

1. If you are an Amatuer/Hobbyist, the default (18F defines for example) that you 'unpack out-of-the-box' allow the majority of the uninitiated to get the product to work in some form or other.

2. Once you spill beyond basics into more custom designs, one hopes you have gained a sufficient knowledge now to be able to go beyond the basics and edit up your INCs and things. *sigh* I know, it's not perfect. Even as a Pro (no, I don't stand on street corners!), it trips me up sometimes. There's nothing more irritating to throw some code together, chose a new PIC that you haven't used before, and get a face full of compiler errors reminding you that you haven't edited that INC file.

Ideally, what MeLabs could do, is have a compler switch eg /i (for /ignore or /idiot) which would cause the compiler not to use the default settings in the INC file and take it all from your program instead. It's not that difficult to parse a command line and impliment, and I always thought I'd get around and do it... but it's lack of time and I'm not that involved in day-to-day programming to bother anymore.

Hello

You can use Atmel controllers with programming language Bascom, that is very identical to PBP pro but more, more powerfull.

Regards
Pedro

I feel that MELabs is doing a great job. I have called for support on the trial version and received it without hesitation. I also had my disk munched just after receiving it in the mail and they replaced it for a minor shipping charge. I think the new power of 2.50 is great and I think they are advancing the product at a reasonable rate. Upgrades are sold at a very reasonable price. Have you ever upgraded a MS product for around 10% the cost of the original software? I am a beginner and have received a ton of help from MELabs, the manual, searching this forum and when all else failed posting for help. I think people need to appreciate how good we have it. I would love it if version 2.60 had integrated DMXIN and DMXOUT routines but like Melanie said that would be way too specialized so I will either learn how to do it myself or pay someone to do it for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedro Pinto

Hello
You can use Atmel controllers with programming language Bascom, that is very identical to PBP pro but more, more powerfull.
Regards
Pedro

---

I have to disagree a bit (I said a bit, I didn't entirely!). Atmel/8051 based MCU's have been around longer than PICs, they have a larger following, but as far as more powerful? The power is behind the keyboard...not in the chip.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by krohtech

I would love it if version 2.60 had integrated DMXIN and DMXOUT routines but like Melanie said that would be way too specialized so I will either learn how to do it myself or pay someone to do it for me.

---

As far as the 'extended' command set goes, if you have written yourself a nice set of PBP extensions (see the Forum topic of the same name), you can easily INCLUDE them for easy access just as a normal PBP command, well, almost as easily. For instance, the PRINTSTR functions that I use for the graphic LCDs, I include 'nokiaknockoff.bas' into my main program. The 'nokiaknockoff.bas' file has the PBP code along with assembly extensions and I access those commands with a simple:
@ printstr 5,6,"this is my function"
inline with my normal PBP code...simple as that.
If you are able to get decent DMXIN/DMXOUT subroutines running, you can easily do the same, whether it be thru a GOSUB or a MACRO.
Of course it's not quite a good as the real thing, but it's a great stepping stone to learning the inner-workings of PBP and compilers in general.

SKIMASK says:
I have to disagree a bit (I said a bit, I didn't entirely!). Atmel/8051 based MCU's have been around longer than PICs, they have a larger following, but as far as more powerful? The power is behind the keyboard...not in the chip.

I have in my previews posting that Bascom are more powerfull and not the chip

Regards
Pedro

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedro Pinto

I have in my previews posting that Bascom are more powerfull and not the chip
Regards
Pedro

---

See and read Post #3...
The power of ANY compiler/assembler/anything is in the keyboard/lever/anything operator...not the chip/engine/whatever.
Bascom may have more functions built into it when it comes from the factory, but is it really 'more powerful'?
It just means that somebody took the time to code more functionality into it (i.e. operated the keyboard better).
Again...Post #3...

You can have 2 out of 3...Fast, Cheap, Good
Fast and Cheap, won't be Good...
Cheap and Good, won't be Fast...
Fast and Good, won't be Cheap...

If you don't innovate your product and you stand behind the whole "here it is, if it isnt good enough, go p*ss up a rope" mentallity, you will get smoked in the end by someone that is willing to innovate. period. the microsofts of the world never innovated, they only bought what someone else had already done and marketed it under the MS brand and now are in the position to charge an outragous price because they now have enough money to sue or buy out their enemies. it isn't because they offer a better product, far from it, they just don't give you a choice. but with micro's you DO have a choice, and I say if MElabs doesn't offer what you like, by all means find something better. and its great that some of us have found a market that they can use PBP in their business, and thats what they do all day, program in PBP, so they understand it top to bottom (and they probably don't know it all either), but some of us have other things to do, this is simply a hobby, and all we ask for is some help now and then from someone who's been there, done that.
Mr. Gates would have never in a million years been able to code windows, he was just smart enough to convice people to do it for him.
PBP like the above poster said was only meant to offer an alternative to basic stamps, which is typically more of a hobby item, so it would stand to reason more people are using PBP as a hobby.. So a message board that offers people help on projects is a great idea, but acting like someone is stupid because they ask for help is kinda lame (the first project in the PBP manual is how to flash a single LED, afterall).. And someone who only programs in assembly could say programming in basic is for people that need their hand held, and just about everyone who loves C do say that! So again, i'd go talk to MElabs, and if they don't see it your way, go fish in another sea!

Well, I agree with you on many levels! (hows that for ya?:) )
I think it all boils right back to the title of the thread, modified just a bit...
MeLabs gettings lazy?
Maybe it's not MeLabs that's getting lazy...maybe it's the end user...
End User's getting lazy?
Somebody always wanting something for nothing...
If PBP actually had all of those neato built-in functions, and had updates to add all of those new commands and the like everytime Microchip came out with a new PIC with new modules inside, PBP would cost as much as Visual Studio 2008 Enterprise (or whatever that really expensive version is), or the end user would end up paying big $$$ for updates because the updates are just that special.
But with all that in mind, there are a LOT of nifty add-ons right here in the forums that could be added to the core of PBP (i.e. the printstr function I keep talking about, DMXIN/DMXOUT type functions, the BarGraphs, and the list goes on and on...). PBP probably isn't a big enough money maker to be the core of a 2 man team at MeLabs and be the major focus. Who can blame them? Business is business...can't beat on something that ain't gonna make you no money...

Well, I just can't stay out of this... I should know better, but alas...

Even though I make products that I market using PBP, I am still a hobbiest for the most part. I have used PICs as glue for many years, but never really learned them as I should have. When I got started, it was pretty much assembly or nothing. I still remember trying to keep Parallax syntax separate in my mind from microchip. I clung to everything that I could find and struggled to make any sense of it.
What eventually happened was that I just gave up for many years. Dabble for a while and then just get frustrated and let it rest again.

I have seen meLabs come a long way over the years and I have been in another re-birth of learning. Most of the credit goes to Jeff and Charles (and LZ) for making an environment that has allowed me to do incredible things that I never could have accomplished without them.

I realize that things are getting more canned these days, and that is a blessing to us all, but for those that are disappointed in the offerings are free to write your own. You might be a bit suprised to find just how hard it is to keep up with every nuance of a flood of new chips and still keep the thing workable and still keep the doors open.

Their efforts continue to make it possible for me. The unbelievable usefulness of this list and the folks that are patient enough to keep answering mundane questions over and over again amaze me.
Thank You all.
-rant mode off-

Bo

BTW, you know what one of the first classes I had to take as an electrical engineer? It was a class where we had to write assembly language code to run a stoplight. Anytime you deal directly with hardware you are going to have do something with assembly code if you want it to work better/faster than what the base code is doing. Unless you are making something for a very small market where you have no competition.

Also here is a post that has a zip file with some CAN code written in what looks like PICBASIC.
http://www.picbasic.co.uk/forum/show...00&postcount=7

Just my 2 cents -

I think PBP is an incredible bargain. Most compilers cost in the $300 range, and then they
want that same amount each year or so for "upgrades". The fact that MELabs charges so little for upgrades has contributed to their wide user base.
Still, I would like the addition of true procedures and functions, and better string handling, as well as hardware I2C (HI2CIN/HI2COUT ?). A few other items would be nice as well.
I would be prepared to pay a lot for those features, since learning a new compiler at this time would cost me thousands in time and lost productivity.
Is there anyone else out there willing to pay a thousand dollars (or more) for a significant upgrade to PBP?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charles Linquis

Is there anyone else out there willing to pay a thousand dollars (or more) for a significant upgrade to PBP?

---

I don't know about a thousand dollars but I would pay more for upgrades or high end spinoffs. I think that if MELabs decides to break the platform into 3 products like Standard, Pro and Premium, I would pay considerably more for the premium features knowing that this additional money would help MELabs expand the platform.

That being said I want to reiterate that I believe we are getting a good product for the current price.

I was aggrevated and I should know better than to post when I'm aggrevated. ME Labs has always had excellent support and I've had them email me bug fixes same day for bugs I found.

I was a little put off with all the errors I was getting on the 18F devices but after searching, and spending a little time reading this forum I got thru it just fine. It's a great product but yes, it can be better. Is it a good value for the price, well maybe. There are numerous other compilers out there, some reasonably priced and some priced pretty high.

What I miss, when comparing PBP to the others, is the lack of built in Floating point routines, and parameters found in true functions and procedures. It just makes the code so much easier to follow and work with.

Will I keep using PBP, yes, but I do find I'm using it less and less. I guess it has a good fit for it's purpose.

At any rate, sorry for the rant, I should know better by now.

Richard

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwskinner

I've had them email me bug fixes same day for bugs I found.

---

Quote:

---

WIKI - A software bug (or just "bug") is an error, flaw, mistake, failure, or fault in a computer program that prevents it from behaving as intended (e.g., producing an incorrect result)

---

Wow! – I have used PBP for about 10 years and have never come across an undocumented bug. In fact, I find MELAB's product to be pretty much rock-solid; 10F through 18F.

It sounds like you have found several bugs. How about posting the details of these bugs you have uncovered so we can avoid finding them as well.

As I stated, I would be willing to pay a decent amount of money for
additional features. Perhaps if enough of us got together we could
come up with cash to get MELab's attention. The money would
at least partially pay for the release of a PBP Premium version.
My guess is that 20 or 25 "investors" would be more than enough.

My "wish list" would include

Procedures and Functions
String handling (Left$, Right$, Mid$, Len)
Floating point
Hardware I2C support
Possible upgrade path to bigger devices (dsPIC, 24F, 30F)

Is there anyone else out there that would be willing to invest
$1000 or more for this effort, or am I just wishful-thinking?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charles Linquis

Is there anyone else out there that would be willing to invest $1000 or more for this effort, or am I just wishful-thinking?

---

$1000 might be a bit much for the home hobby type...but I'd surely go for a 'higher' version and pay for it.

I'd add my $1000 to yours Charles.

Not that I actually want anything in particular - I managed to develop routines to get PBP to do everything I ever wanted - and in the process earned a shed-load money from it. Don't actually use it myself anymore, but it's still there, being updated periodically and now others in the Company are using it for product development - so perhaps for their benefit. Like I said at the beginning of this thread, everyone wants more for less, and I'm no different - just in my case I want more productivity for less time.

But I don't think you'll get too many more takers.

Arrrrgh, I dislike these threads!
Frankly I haven't read it all. But I still have to chime in here.

Have we forgotten already!!

Was it not just a few months ago that MeLabs turned PBP into a 32-bit language.
In contrast to the 16-bit language it has been for many years.

Lazy, I think not!

That single upgrade was Humongous!
The number of macro's increased from 3 thousand+ to over 5000 !!!!

This stuff doesn't happen by magic.
Somebody actually has to write it. (Jeff Schmoyer)

Then Someone has to test it. (Charles Leo)

The two go back and forth for months to make sure it will work when you use it.
E: I think there's a few others involved too??

Then if something is still wrong, they accept emails (and are very good at responding).
And with every problem ever mentioned (that I know of), they've fixed it.

Does that mean they've solved your problem of communication with NMEA 2000 over a CAN buss? NO! That's your job.

I'm with Melanie.
There's never been anything that a PIC can do, that I haven't been able to do with PicBasic Pro.

If delivering the perfect compiler with ongoing support makes you lazy? Then you're right.
<br>

Hello,
I think PBP is a bargain at 250 bucks, anyone ever priced Mastercam or surfcam or orcad?
Boo Koo Bucks, many many thousands of dollars, and an annual license fee. My hat's off to
M. E. Labs, Thank You for a great product.
JS

It is a bargain. But what is wrong with wanting more - especially when you offer to pay for it?

Hi Charles,
I suppose that's why a cheap car costs 25 thousand dollars, nobody wants a BASIC car anymore (word play intentional).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joe S.

Hi Charles,
I suppose that's why a cheap car costs 25 thousand dollars, nobody wants a BASIC car anymore (word play intentional).

---

$25K? Until 3 years ago, I never paid more than $1200 for a car!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darrel Taylor

Arrrrgh, I dislike these threads!
Frankly I haven't read it all. But I still have to chime in here.

---

Hello Darrel,

I would like to ask you to read the entire thread. I understand that the title makes it sound as if it's a ME Labs bashing thread but most of the feedback is positive.

Ok, I have read it all.

Still sounds like a lot of whining to me.
And a couple people disagreeing with them.

Doesn't do this, doesn't do that.
This compilers better, that compilers better.

They just take all our money and never give us anything, boo-hoo-hoo.
If only PBP had this one function, I could write a program that would make me Lots of money.
But that stupid PicBasic compiler doesn't have that, so it's melabs fault that I'm still broke.

I mean, come-on, I gave them $250, that's like maybe a days pay for many professionals.
They should give me everything, and write new ones to my request.<hr>
Possibly a little over-dramatized, but that's what I see.

My statement still stands.
With 2.50, melabs just doubled the power of PicBasic Pro, for a meer $25.
I can't imagine how they even keep the doors open with such little income.

They are not the lazy one's.
<br>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skimask

$25K? Until 3 years ago, I never paid more than $1200 for a car!

---

Hi, Ski

Humour ON

May be that's why your engines have exploded !!! ( I really don't remember where I read that ...)

Humour OFF

Regards

Alain

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Acetronics

Hi, Ski
Humour ON
May be that's why your engines have exploded !!! ( I really don't remember where I read that ...)
Humour OFF
Regards
Alain

---

Humour ON / OFF - must be part of that new HTML code for the Internet 2.0 :)

Engines - not a car this time, it was my garden tractor. But on a side note, I have blown up my share (+ a few others shares) of engines...most on purpose...something about a brick that magically gets stuck on a throttle...I haven't the faintest idea how that happened...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darrel Taylor

My statement still stands.
With 2.50, melabs just doubled the power of PicBasic Pro, for a meer $25.

---

Don't you mean the power of PicBasicPro just went up by about 2^16?

Hmmm, well ...

It does give you a few billion more possibilities.
But it doesn't feel like it's 65,536 times more powerful.

I think I'll stick with double. :)
<br>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darrel Taylor

I think I'll stick with double. :)

---

I'll buy that...literally...
I know some of my longer code has really shortened up quite a bit now that I'm able to put more math on one line...with more colons of course.
At the expense of more code space usage though... I'm still OPTIMIZING my latest proggy back down below 64K to add more functionality. 2100 lines and still going... Another optimization project anyone? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skimask

I know some of my longer code has really shortened up quite a bit now that I'm able to put more math on one line...with more colons of course.
At the expense of more code space usage though... I'm still OPTIMIZING my latest proggy back down below 64K to add more functionality. 2100 lines and still going... Another optimization project anyone? :D

---

I've contacted my vendor, and all he could come up with was 20 cases of toilet paper.

With 64k in 2100 lines, there's just too many colons to "Optimize".

If I don't have to kill any trees. I'd take a look. :)
<br>

Hi, Ski

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skimask

Humour ON / OFF - must be part of that new HTML code for the Internet 2.0 :)

---

That's Quite usual on this side of the Atlantic ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skimask

Engines - not a car this time, it was my garden tractor.

---

If you want ... I've just installed an Onboard computer on my brand new Honda Lawn Tractor ... ( 18F2520 )

Could help you to take some litlle care of your next engines ...

But, I've not added the Phalanx option against flying objects yet ...

Cheers

Alain

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darrel Taylor

With 64k in 2100 lines, there's just too many colons to "Optimize".
If I don't have to kill any trees. I'd take a look. :)
<br>

---

I did a search/replace with MS Word. Came up with 2700 colons :D
Maybe I'll clean it up a bit and tack it onto the end of that other optimzation thread...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Acetronics

If you want ... I've just installed an Onboard computer on my brand new Honda Lawn Tractor ... ( 18F2520 )
Could help you to take some litlle care of your next engines ...
But, I've not added the Phalanx option against flying objects yet ...
Cheers
Alain

---

Well, let me rephrase that a bit...
I didn't blow it up...it blew itself up!
Amazing chain of events...
As far as I can tell:
Starter gear hung up in the 'start' position, chewed up the flywheel gear, bits and pieces flew out, parts got hung up on the governor shaft, got the engine stuck on high speed, over-revved it a bunch, broke a connecting rod, which flew out the side of the engine block, which must have bounced off the side cover and back onto the hydraulic pump drive shaft, which broke apart and flew up into the bottom of the battery causing it to spill acid everywhere. Also, the whole time the starter must have been trying to draw maximum current, which melted the main wiring harness and a few other things.
The whole time (only about 10-15 seconds), I'm standing about 25 feet away waiting for the whole thing to stop...
I'm a fairly meticulous maintainer of pieces/parts...but I think somehow this was completely beyond my control... (I should've let the wife do the driveway that day, that way I could blame it all on her).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skimask

Well, let me rephrase that a bit...
I didn't blow it up...it blew itself up!
Amazing chain of events...

---

Life might be wonderful for your Neighbourhood ... I'd appreciated a little video of that !!!

I give an A+ ... just as good as the " Raggot cannon hamster " story, these days ...

http://www.dailymotion.com/relevance...-inter_animals

Sorry, it's in French ... But I still laugh at it !!!

Try the KeyWords :

Thomazevski Eric
Farnum Andrew
Salt Lake city Hospital

Was Published by The L.A.Times ...

BINGO here : http://www.freewebs.com/knutsero/moro.htm

Alain

PS Worth the search effort ...really !!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skimask

l... (I should've let the wife do the driveway that day, that way I could blame it all on her).

---

It's too darned cold where you live to be blaming anything on the wife . . . an' have to sleep alone . . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Acetronics

Life might be wonderful for your Neighbourhood ... I'd appreciated a little video of that !!!

I give an A+ ... just as good as the " Raggot cannon hamster " story, these days ...

http://www.dailymotion.com/relevance...-inter_animals

Sorry, it's in French ... But I still laugh at it !!!

Try the KeyWords :

Thomazevski Eric
Farnum Andrew
Salt Lake city Hospital

Was Published by The L.A.Times ...

BINGO here : http://www.freewebs.com/knutsero/moro.htm

Alain

PS Worth the search effort ...really !!

---

That is DISTURBING! but funny.

[QUOTE=Acetronics;52223]I give an A+ ... just as good as the " Raggot cannon hamster " story, these days ...[QUOTE]
(think about the movie Stripes)
There's something wrong with us....something very WRRRROOONNNGGGGGG.......
And there was something very WWRRRROOOONNNNGGG with that search!!! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joe S.

It's too darned cold where you live to be blaming anything on the wife . . . an' have to sleep alone . . .

---

Heck, it was mid-50's today! I even broke out the pressure washer!
Of course, to stay on topic, I was checking out one of my latest PIC prog's...(high pressure monitor)...