Hi Joep,

Actually, I'm glad you spoke up-- I really should replace the 2 nops
with a 1mS delay. See if you agree -- check the datasheet for the
device.

Thanks,

William


On Oct 17, 12:47 am, Joep Suijs <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi William,
>
> > About the nop's, I will add some comments to explain that when
> > changing the oscillator's frequency drastically, I think it is safest
> > to add a little delay before trying to do any 'real work'.  In
> > retrospect, this might be a good place for me to use that nice inline
> > delay routine instead of the nops.
>
> Is there any documentation (prefeably from microchip) that adding these
> instructions is good practice?
>
> A nop instruction 'does nothing' and intuitive is safer. At second thought,
> I'd say there is not so much difference - the processor has to fetch the
> instruction, increment the IP, decode the instruction and carfully do it's
> stuff (which is this case is leaving all registers and memory alone). If it
> can do this, why can't it set a register to zero etc.?
>
> If this is the case, I don't think it is a good idea to document the nop to
> be related to the oscillator change.
>
> Joep
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"jallib" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to