| ??? 03/01/06 14:10 Read: times |
#110973 - waiting better than uninten effcy Responding to: ???'s previous message |
well...since I have to send continuous 10 bytes to the computer, I guess its better to wait for every byte to be send before sending next byte rather than that unintended *efficiency* of C code. I think the putchar() code is better if only a byte is to be send once a while, not a bulk of data.and do we also need to set the value of TL1 for serial communication like we do for TH1? if yes, with what value? |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| putchar C51 serial communication problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Keil putchar source | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| putchar() reworded | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| TI | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| thanks and here is my C code of asm... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| should be obvious | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| To be fair | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| C gives higher performance! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Initial conditions | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| waiting better than uninten effcy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Better? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Math? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| What????? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| no work to do unitl bytes send | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| OK | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| or... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| That is better | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| i read about putchar() | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Try \Keil\C51\LIB\getkey.c | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Keil Library Source Files | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ok | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No and Yes | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| but what about AT cmd | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
No | 01/01/70 00:00 |