MAX7219 Helping Hand Please

[RussMartin]

You learned how to do this when you were 5 (give or take), you just don't know it...

You count to ten on your fingers, but you want to keep counting, so what do you do?
You get your brother to HOLD the PLACE of the overflow from your fingers, so every time you go over 10, you reset to ZERO, and he adds another finger, and you keep counting.
Well, now your brother is out of fingers, so what do you do?
You get your sister to count the overflows from your brother.

You overflow, reset, add one to your brother...keep counting...
Your brother overflows, resets, and adds one to your sister...keep counting...
And so on and so on and so on...
So, you are counting ones...
Your brother is counting tens...
Your sister is counting hundreds...

Now, replace the words YOU, BROTHER, and SISTER, with some other digit placeholder that's compatible with PBP... Now what in PBP could possibly hold the value of a digit (or digits) of some sort?

IMNSHO:

On the "silly" scale, this rates:

-|--------^-|+

On the "helpful" scale, it rates:

-|^---------|+

I'm glad I didn't learn this way when I was 5, back in 1955, with no sisters and only a brother . . .

. . . and I'm pretty sure isaac, as any one of the rest of us, understands counting in base 10 without a condescending "finger-counting" illustration.

[skimask]

. . . and I'm pretty sure isaac, as any one of the rest of us, understands counting in base 10 without a condescending "finger-counting" illustration.

Maybe so, maybe not...BUT....
For somebody that can't grasp the concept of splitting up numbers into smaller chunks, they might need to be reminded of the basics. And it's obvious to me that, while you might know how to make larger numbers out of a bunch of smaller numbers, didn't get what I was getting at the most basic level.
While some people might think that they can 'think' in base2/base8/base10 and base16 all at the same time, just because they can 'program a PIC', can they really?
'cause that's exactly what the O/P wanted to know...how to keep track (i.e. count, manipulate, etc.) numbers to large to fit in a byte/word (i.e. hand). Think about it. At the most basic level, all we can do is mess with a byte. How does PBP multiply 32bit numbers? It breaks them down to the byte level and plays with them as needed.
Way back in the day, before I had PBP and used to do nothing but assembly work (before I knew what I was doing really) on the PIC and needed to count large numbers to display on an LCD, I'd break the bytes up into BCD, and work with them that way. I could deal with virtually any size number that way, limited only by the amount of ram on the PIC.
So, condescending finger counting example?
Maybe...
If a person takes that example in the negative fashion, then just maybe that person hasn't learned as much as they thought they have.
Another quicky example of what I'm getting at... My wife can (and does) drive a relatively fast car. But she can't do a tune-up, rebuild the engine, or drive in the Indy 500.

In the end though, I think it would just be a lot easier for Isaac to figure out why his system isn't playing well with PBPL and LONG's.

[RussMartin]

Way back in the day, before I had PBP and used to do nothing but assembly work (before I knew what I was doing really) on the PIC and needed to count large numbers to display on an LCD, I'd break the bytes up into BCD, and work with them that way. I could deal with virtually any size number that way, limited only by the amount of ram on the PIC.

That's pretty much the same way I had to do it "way back in the day" . . . in 1969 on an IBM 1130 with a 2310 disk drive using a 2315 "pizza box" removable disk about 14 inches in diameter. Sadly, the LCD had yet to be invented, so the output was to an 1132 chain printer.

. . . it's obvious to me that, while you might know how to make larger numbers out of a bunch of smaller numbers, didn't get what I was getting at the most basic . . .

An exercise in making larger numbers out of much smaller numbers was in June and July, 1967, when I was calculating the values, determining the periods ("rings"), and counting the digit distributions in repeating decimal fractions of the form 1/(10x-1) on a Philco 2000. For x=1, 1/9 is easy, 0.1111 . . . But for x=2, 1/19, the fraction is 0.052631578947368421 before it repeats, beginning again with "0526 . . . " (18-digit period or "ring") and going on, forever repeating. For x=3, 1/29, the procedure is the same, and so on. The objective was to create an algorithm for generating random numbers.

The actual math is all whole numbers, no fractions, and . . . well, I'll let skimask explain how to do it.

If a person takes that example in the negative fashion, then just maybe that person hasn't learned as much as they thought they have.

I have in fact learned as much as I think I have . . . but I haven't learned nearly as much as I want to know!

[skimask]

That's pretty much the same way I had to do it "way back in the day" . . . in 1969 on an IBM 1130 with a 2310 disk drive using a 2315 "pizza box" removable disk about 14 inches in diameter. Sadly, the LCD had yet to be invented, so the output was to an 1132 chain printer.

OUCH! Ok, I never had to go thru that (a few years ahead of my time), but I can about imagine. My very very first MCU/CPU type project back in '80, was a Z80 (+1K ram, handful of LEDs, a few HEX switches and pushbuttons, and debouncing for the 'program' switches), programming the code into the RAM with the switches to blink a single LED. Took me 6 hours to program it, a simple loop with a delay, and it actually worked the first time. Got damn lucky. Gave up after that 'cause the school got Apple II+'s.
You didn't even have a 'nixie tube' (sp?) for display or what?

An exercise in making larger numbers out of much smaller numbers....

My OBD project has me going out to 15 decimals, not because I have, but because I can. Absolutely no need for it except for error stack up over time.
On a side note, that paragraph just gave me a bit of an idea to help me better randomize more numbers in another project I've got going.

I have in fact learned as much as I think I have . . . but I haven't learned nearly as much as I want to know!

Ok, fair enough... The point being, from this end, was basically, the same as it always is (or at least it always seems to be when somebody has a problem)
Break it (whatever IT is) down, wayyyy down, and build it back up.

[RussMartin]

skimask, sometimes we seem to hijack threads even when we don't intend to.

So how about taking our discussions, disputations, sparring, polysyllabic profundity, rodomontade, thrasonical bombast, and occasional psittaceous vacuity (or even simple one-upsmanship) to "Off Topic"?

Our new thread there should be S&M . . . for skimask and Martin, of course! (Let others read into it what they will . . . )

That way, we can both avoid the embarrassment of contributing to "thread bloat" that doesn't help the original poster, or, as bad or worse, leading the thread into the "Confusion Zone" that Darrel mentioned elsewhere.

I'm willing if you are . . .

Meanwhile, let's both be truly helpful.

[skimask]

skimask, sometimes we seem to hijack threads even when we don't intend to.
So how about taking our discussions, disputations, sparring, polysyllabic profundity, rodomontade, thrasonical bombast, and occasional psittaceous vacuity (or even simple one-upsmanship) to "Off Topic"?
Our new thread there should be S&M . . . for skimask and Martin, of course! (Let others read into it what they will . . . )
That way, we can both avoid the embarrassment of contributing to "thread bloat" that doesn't help the original poster, or, as bad or worse, leading the thread into the "Confusion Zone" that Darrel mentioned elsewhere.
I'm willing if you are . . .
Meanwhile, let's both be truly helpful.

Of course...what a great idea...
http://www.picbasic.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=6379

[isaac]

Hi Guys
Please no puching in my name
You guys are all helping to us whom want to learn
the actual problem was not actually how to split the number up but have to write the write it to the Max7219

No Fighting
Isaac