16F1827 table not behaving as expected


Closed Thread
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    4,959


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default Re: 16F1827 table not behaving as expected

    Hi J.,

    When you asked about LOOKUP2 previously, I had to ask.
    The answer I got was 256.

    That was only half right.
    The compiler executable was changed ... but the macro's were not.
    So while the compiler won't complain up to 256 ... the macros only work up to 85. (256/3)

    Charles says the executable will be changed back to 85.
    I think the macros should be changed to work with 256, but I'd have to do it in that case.
    Unless Bruce beats me to it.

    Are those EXT tables looking better yet?
    DT

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    2,405


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default Re: 16F1827 table not behaving as expected

    Unless Bruce beats me to it.
    Nice try, but I'll wait for the patch....

    If you could yank Charles off those dang race cars, I bet he could fix it ASAP...;o)
    Last edited by Bruce; - 1st April 2011 at 21:33.
    Regards,

    -Bruce
    tech at rentron.com
    http://www.rentron.com

Members who have read this thread : 0

You do not have permission to view the list of names.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts