> All I said was that a mode that CANNOT fail is better than one that 
> has that possibility.

That's exactly what I disagree with. IMHO it does not make sense to
throw any effort (hardware or softwere or wetware) at avoiding a failure
mode if you can't also avoid all other failure modes that have a similar
chance of ocurring.

> If you were building equipment for eg a Martian orbiter I 
> imagine that 
> you'd try rteally really really hard to make a design that could have 
> ANY pin glitch into any state at any time while absolutely minimising 
> impact. 

*If* your design does this *then* I would agree that tying unised pins
high or low with a resistor makes sense. But only *if*.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: www.voti.nl/hvu
 
 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist