Hi Melanie,
Yes I understand that you can take the approach you just gave, but I tend to like things to mean what they say. If I have a statement that says "Pauseus 100" then I would like it to actually mean that I am taking a 100 microsecond pause. In this case we really aren't talking about "thinking outside of the box", but instead, about writing understandable code. Besides we aren't just talking about Pause routines here. There are 24 PBP functions that are all affected by incorrect oscillator selection.
Code:
COUNT, DEBUG, DEBUGIN,DTMFOUT,FREQOUT,HPWM,HSERIN,HSEROUT,
I2CREAD,I2CWRITE,LCDOUT,OWIN,OWOUT,PAUSE,PAUSEUS,
SERIN,SERIN2,SEROUT,SEROUT2,SHIFTIN,SHIFTOUT,
SOUND,XIN, and XOUT
I would hate to come back later, and try to debug even my own code, not say someone elses, if I used the method you suggested. Especially if a variety of the functions mentioned above were sprinkled throughout.
Don't get me wrong, I like PBP, and really appreciate the effort that had to be put into making it what it is today. However this is a "Wish List" and my wish is to see a better way to do the Oscillator Define, so that all functions utilizing timing in their makeup continue to do what they say, and to mean what they mean. Is this asking too much? Or am I developing a case of OCD?
Bookmarks