On Thu, 27 Nov 1997 12:56:28 -0700, you wrote:

>Hiya Mike,
>
>I did optimise your code a couple of years ago and posted it on the PICLIST
>back then. 
nice tweak - I didn't look at using addlw at the time as I wanted 5x
compatibility (may even have been written before the 16CXX parts!). 
 
> I also did 19200 and 38400 versions and posted those (but with
>errors that Andy Warren spotted <very red face>).  I credited both you and
>Andy for the original idea and the discussion that led to my optimisation.
Only recently got on the net, so didn't see it!

>I found that I got errors on the receive side with some comm programs.  It
>appears that they don't like that the stop bit tends to be a little bit long
>between individual characters (caused by the amount of time it takes to get
>the next character to be transmitted.  Increasing to 2 or more stop bits
>eliminated the error in every instance that it was encountered.

... err a stop bit shouldn't be able to be too *long* - lengthening it
should just add idle time! Maybe if you send a lot of data
back-to-back, a sub-bitlength between characters may prevent the
receiver re-syncing properly? Obviously, the stopbit time can be too
short, especially with slow receivers!


     ____                                                           ____
   _/ L_/  Mike Harrison / White Wing Logic / wwl@netcomuk.co.uk  _/ L_/
 _/ W_/  Hardware & Software design / PCB Design / Consultancy  _/ W_/
/_W_/  Industrial / Computer Peripherals / Hazardous Area      /_W_/