Same code in different Pins

[skimask]

Nope, won't work.

For instance, with this statement...

owout pin.0[index], 1, ["data here"]

PBP will do an Array Out from the indexed pin, then use that result as the "PIN number" which will be either a 0 or 1. So it will always use either PORTB.0 if the pin is low, or PORTB.1 if the Pin is high.
<br>

---deleted---I don't follow you at the moment...

I got what you saying... pin.0[index] is actually a bit variable...0 or 1 correspoonding to port B
but if you say it's not going to work...then chances are good that it's not going to work...

[Darrel Taylor]

... pin.0[index] is actually a bit variable...0 or 1 correspoonding to port B

This is another one of those examples where arrays act differently depending on whether a Constant or a Variable is used as the index.

Using the same statement...

owout pin.0[index], 1, ["data here"]

If index is a Constant, it does what you thought, and will use the index to select the Pin as an offset from PORTA.0. So 8 would be PORTB.0. But then, you can't change it at run-time.

IF index is a variable, then it makes it an Array operation that will read the value of the indexed Pin (0 or 1), that value then becomes the "PIN Number".

When a statement works 2 different ways like that it's hard to grasp sometimes.
Not sure why meLabs did things that way.
<br>

[skimask]

This is another one of those examples where arrays act differently depending on whether a Constant or a Variable is used as the index.
Using the same statement...
owout pin.0[index], 1, ["data here"]
If index is a Constant, it does what you thought, and will use the index to select the Pin as an offset from PORTA.0. So 8 would be PORTB.0. But then, you can't change it at run-time.
IF index is a variable, then it makes it an Array operation that will read the value of the indexed Pin (0 or 1), that value then becomes the "PIN Number".
When a statement works 2 different ways like that it's hard to grasp sometimes.
Not sure why meLabs did things that way.
<br>

Might be the difference between a $250 compiler and a $2,500 compiler.
But I got what you were getting at.

I think the original post'ers only option is to do the SELECT CASE thing, combine all OWOUT's into one place, use a generic "data here" string type array variable and go with it.

[Darrel Taylor]

I think the original post'ers only option is to do the SELECT CASE thing,

Well, I think Josuetas' best option can be found in Post #4
<br>

[skimask]

Well, I think Josuetas' best option can be found in Post #4
<br>

True, but what if the pins are on PortA, or D, or E, or F, or G, or H, or J

[Darrel Taylor]

True, but what if the pins are on PortA, or D, or E, or F, or G, or H, or J

Then you would change the PORTL and or PORTH assignments in the .bas file for the chip you are using.

PORTL and PORTH determine which ports are used for "Pin Numbers".
PORTL is 0-7
PORTH is 8-15
<br>

[skimask]

Then you would change the PORTL and or PORTH assignments in the .bas file for the chip you are using.

PORTL and PORTH determine which ports are used for "Pin Numbers".
PORTL is 0-7
PORTH is 8-15
<br>

Are you talking about the .bas file in the PBP directory?
I would've thought the compiler would go nuts if you changed anything in those .bas files... I know you can change the .inc files....hmm... interesting thoughts brewing in my head now...
Thanks a lot...now I got more crap to think about!

[keithdoxey]

Then you would change the PORTL and or PORTH assignments in the .bas file for the chip you are using.

PORTL and PORTH determine which ports are used for "Pin Numbers".
PORTL is 0-7
PORTH is 8-15
<br>

Hi Darrel,

I have looked in the .bas file for the 18F452 and located the following code

PORTL   VAR     PORTB
PORTH   VAR     PORTC
TRISL   VAR     TRISB
TRISH   VAR     TRISC

Would I be correct in assuming that you also have to "adjust" the TRISL and TRISH aliases as well?

I take it that the ports dont have to be consecutive so that I could put

PORTL   VAR     PORTB
PORTH   VAR     PORTD
TRISL   VAR     TRISB
TRISH   VAR     TRISD

Which would give me 0-7 = PortB.0-PortB.7 and 8-15 = PortD.0-PortD.7

If so that greatly simplifies something I am trying to impliment. The reason I want to change PORTH from C to D is that I need to use the USART which is on C6 and C7 so that would only give me 14 useable pins.


DOH !!!!

Thatll teach me not to make sure I have a newly refreshed view of a thread before I post a reply !!!!