Multiple Interrupts using TMR0 and Interrupt On Change (IOCB) simultaneously

[rsocor01]

Hi,

Why don't you use Darrel's interrupts? It's a lot easier than ON INTERRUPT GOTO ISR.

Also, it is much easier to include a line in your MAIN routine that monitors the state of a switch. You can use the pullup resistors in PORTB, a switch, and a line of code with an IF statement to do what you want. Of course, you need to de bounce the switch.

[Jerson]

If you look into the PBP manual, you will notice that PBP does not handle interrupts like they are meant to be. They are polled. So, there is a lot of latency involved.

"Using ON INTERRUPT, when an interrupt occurs PBP simply flags the event and immediately goes back to what it was doing. It does not immediately vector to your interrupt handler. Since PBP statements are not re-entrant (PBP must finish the statement that is being executed before it can begin a new one) there could be considerable delay (latency) before the interrupt is handled."

You should get used to using assembler interrupts in PBP. Much more power and deterministic. Read "interrupts in Assembler" in the manual. Better still, use Darrels' interrupt code as suggested by rsocor01

[Jerson]

If you look into the PBP manual, you will notice that PBP does not handle interrupts like they are meant to be. They are polled. So, there is a lot of latency involved.

"Using ON INTERRUPT, when an interrupt occurs PBP simply flags the event and immediately goes back to what it was doing. It does not immediately vector to your interrupt handler. Since PBP statements are not re-entrant (PBP must finish the statement that is being executed before it can begin a new one) there could be considerable delay (latency) before the interrupt is handled."

You should get used to using assembler interrupts in PBP. Much more power and deterministic. Read "interrupts in Assembler" in the manual. Better still, use Darrels' interrupt code as suggested by rsocor01

[flotulopex]

Thanks a lot for your info.

For the time being, I'll try to keep it as simple as possible, correct my current code according to Richard's and Roscor's remarks