Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
> Well, that's how one could expect it to work, but
> not as I interpret the datasheet. :-)
>
> Was you able to "see" if the programming runed after
> wring 8 words or after writing all 16 words ?
> If it erased and re-programed in chunks of 16 words
> it would make sense.

I haven't looked at that issue in that datasheet, but there is pretty much
only one way it can work.  It appears the erase size is 16 words and the
write buffer is 8 words.  This sort of thing isn't unusual.  I'd expect the
erase block to always be 16-word aligned and write blocks 8-word aligned.
That would mean you'd erase a block of 16 words, but it would require two
write operations to load new data into them.  How else could it work?


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist