AVR-Chat

Works perfectly here, just checked it again. Try reassembling
again (build and run)

I should add that the program seems to be getting just 1 byte of
data from the table before landing and stopping on DONE instead of
the 99 bytes it is suppose to read (??)

Regards

John Samperi

********************************************************
Ampertronics Pty. Ltd.
11 Brokenwood Place Baulkham Hills, NSW 2153 AUSTRALIA
Tel. (02) 9674-6495       Fax (02) 9674-8745
Email: john@ampertronics.com.au
Website  http://www.ampertronics.com.au
*Electronic Design * Custom Products * Contract Assembly
********************************************************

Quite right, John.  I haven't yet completed the code for the timer and 
the interrupt handler for the timer, which will sequence through the 
table.   I tend to develop code in steps, and test as I go, to simplify 
debugging.


(NOTE:   I am an experienced programmer, and a huge fan of the AVR 
family, but this is the first significant AVR assembly language program 
I have attempted to write, and I am obviously having some problems with 
the tools, and with what I *THOUGHT* I understood of the details of 
implementation.  I will get better, I promise.

  My previous experience with AVRs was with some AT90S1200 and AT90S8515 
chips sold by a vendor out of Boston, MA, USA, who embeds a proprietary 
BASIC interpreter into the chips, and sells them for $7 and $25 each, 
qty 1.  I implemented some control units for several interactive video 
kiosks for a Kool Aid (yes, Kool Aid) museum in Hastings, Nebraska.  I 
used the BASIC enabled units because I was on an extremely tight 
deadline, and hadn;t the time then to learn a new processor and assembly 
language, and wasan;t at that time familiar with all the tools avaialbel 
fore the AVR family.)

tom

John Samperi wrote:

>
> Works perfectly here, just checked it again. Try reassembling
> again (build and run)
>
> I should add that the program seems to be getting just 1 byte of
> data from the table before landing and stopping on DONE instead of
> the 99 bytes it is suppose to read (??)
>

At 01:42 AM 4/01/2007, you wrote:
>I am an experienced programmer, and a huge fan of the AVR

Nice to know, on BOTH counts. It looked like you were some
young learner at one stage trying to byte more than you could
chew :)

If you can use C (I can't) then install WinAvr as it is now
integrated with Studio. It you want to stay with assembler
then you will get as much help as you need here or on
AVRFreaks.net. Once you get your learner's wheels off your bike
you will be flying.

I have used assembler with different types of processors for the
past 25 year++ and with AVRs for about 6 years now. PLEASE forgive
me if I don't see what you are getting at immediately or if you do
things differently from what I expect to be done :)


Regards

John Samperi

********************************************************
Ampertronics Pty. Ltd.
11 Brokenwood Place Baulkham Hills, NSW 2153 AUSTRALIA
Tel. (02) 9674-6495       Fax (02) 9674-8745
Email: john@ampertronics.com.au
Website  http://www.ampertronics.com.au
*Electronic Design * Custom Products * Contract Assembly
********************************************************

>
>
> If you can use C (I can't) then install WinAvr as it is now
> integrated with Studio. It you want to stay with assembler
> then you will get as much help as you need here or on
> AVRFreaks.net. Once you get your learner's wheels off your bike
> you will be flying.


Personally, I find the signal/noise ratio too low over on "freaks".

If you can do it, don't hesitate to upload the code set here, we can
probably figure it out faster that way.
Sometimes the problems are not where you'd expect them to be.

I have used assembler with different types of processors for the
> past 25 year++ and with AVRs for about 6 years now. PLEASE forgive
> me if I don't see what you are getting at immediately or if you do
> things differently from what I expect to be done :)


I'm starting to work with C now, but man it grinds my gears.
I keep thinking things like "DAMMIT, that should be THREE instructions, not
30!"


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]