On Wed, 12 Feb 1997, Miller, Steve wrote: > Several good suggestions have been offered for this problem. Here is my > two cents. The cheapest thing to change is software. I would interested > in a programming suite of tools geared specifically at the development > environment. I would like programming software that does not allow the > protection bits to be set ever. This development software would never > code protect a part. During development we could use this safe version, > for customer prototypes and production we could use full featured > programming software. > > Here is an opportunity for all the folks writing programmer software. > Make us a version that will never intentionally set the code protect > bits. I would gladly pay the cost of a few JW packages just to be sure > that I did not choose the wrong option. I know that programming errors > can occasionally inadvertantly code protect a part. That brings me back to one of my original questions. Can anyone explain the programming sequence of a PIC. i.e. How much error checking is involved ? Does the programmer send a special command to access the fuses (so a programmer could ommit this command and hence prevent hardware errors accidently setting code protect. ? Basically Microchip have pretty much ruled out the possibility of a hardware change so is there anything programmers can do WITH EXISTING CHIPS to be as sure as possible that code protect doesn't get set. I realise it isn't too difficult to disable the e.g. -c option on the command line parser but are there any further steps one can take to stop accidental hardware 1 -> 0 errors . I.E. never have the chip in a mode where it could program the code protect bit by only a single bit error. Anyone please ? > However, if we can > eliminate operator error, I think we can save quite a lot of chips! > > > ------ Steve > I'm sure some of the shareware writers may have already taken up this challenge and I reckon this sort of option will probably be available soon. David. http://www.csn.ul.ie/~david