Hamish Moffatt wrote:

> I should have specified in my original message. I don't mind if the
> parity bit is actually tested or not -- I'm happy for it to be simply
> discarded.

  That should be easy then.  Point me to a piece of (almost-) working
code which doesn't allow for parity, and I'll try and bodge you a
Victorian special version that does!  It's just an extra implementation
of the stop-bit routine.
--
  Cheers,
        Paul B.