On 6/4/2013 4:44 PM, Peter wrote: > jpes.com> writes: >> Theoretically possible, but I doubt it would work in practice. There > It works fine. One does not check responses during programming at all, ga= ng > programming all together, then one verifies each individually. Verificati= on > is MUCH faster than programming, can be 200-1000 times faster for 10msec > programming pulses, with 1usec/bit readout speeds, therefore this is a ma= jor > speedup. Most gang programmers use this technique, for pics, mcus, EEPROM= s > and all that. This is a well known art [r][tm], (patent trolls and other > dimwits beware - just in case). > > -- Peter > > I'm not disagreeing with you, BUT: ISTR an app note or article, possibly from or at Microchip that=20 described the fastest algorithm (at the time) was to use a very short=20 programming pulse (it's not even clear in my mind that this can be=20 controlled on a PIC), read back the result and repeat until the value=20 "sticks", then repeat N more times for some recommended value of N. =20 Which would not be possible with parallel chips. Joe W --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .