PIC24F winge

Thread View: sci.electronics.design

4 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

4 total messages Started by Sylvia Else Mon, 09 Jan 2012 01:07

#398

Author: Sylvia Else
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 01:07

18 lines
1659 bytes

I suppose I should read errata sheets, but I expect them to contain 
obscure edge cases, not information to the effect that a basic function 
of the chip won't work when configured in the documented way, and that 
the work around is to change the configuration on an unrelated pin.

What caught me was item 9 in

http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/80473g.pdf

The effect is that the UART RX (on RB2) won't work unless one changes 
RA2 to be non-analogue input (it defaults to analogue).

Haven't these people heard of testing?

Looks like a revision without this fault has been out for at least a 
year, so how come RS Components sold me an earlier revision?

Sylvia.

Re: PIC24F winge

#399

Author: TTman
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 16:52

15 lines
1795 bytes

>
> http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/80473g.pdf
>
> The effect is that the UART RX (on RB2) won't work unless one changes RA2 
> to be non-analogue input (it defaults to analogue).
>
> Haven't these people heard of testing?
>
> Looks like a revision without this fault has been out for at least a year, 
> so how come RS Components sold me an earlier revision?
>
> Sylvia.
>

Because that's what they had in stock...

Re: PIC24F winge

#364

Author: Joerg
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 00:37

29 lines
2158 bytes

Sylvia Else wrote:
> I suppose I should read errata sheets, but I expect them to contain
> obscure edge cases, not information to the effect that a basic function
> of the chip won't work when configured in the documented way, and that
> the work around is to change the configuration on an unrelated pin.
> 
> What caught me was item 9 in
> 
> http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/80473g.pdf
> 
> The effect is that the UART RX (on RB2) won't work unless one changes
> RA2 to be non-analogue input (it defaults to analogue).
> 
> Haven't these people heard of testing?
> 

Wot testing? Isn't that what the customer is supposed to do? :-)


> Looks like a revision without this fault has been out for at least a
> year, so how come RS Components sold me an earlier revision?
> 

So I take it that "winge" is Australian for "rant", right?

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Re: PIC24F winge

#382

Author: Dennis
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 06:05

40 lines
2888 bytes

"Joerg" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:9n43ufF39vU2@mid.individual.net...
> Sylvia Else wrote:
>> I suppose I should read errata sheets, but I expect them to contain
>> obscure edge cases, not information to the effect that a basic function
>> of the chip won't work when configured in the documented way, and that
>> the work around is to change the configuration on an unrelated pin.
>>
>> What caught me was item 9 in
>>
>> http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/80473g.pdf
>>
>> The effect is that the UART RX (on RB2) won't work unless one changes
>> RA2 to be non-analogue input (it defaults to analogue).
>>
>> Haven't these people heard of testing?
>>
>
> Wot testing? Isn't that what the customer is supposed to do? :-)
>
>
>> Looks like a revision without this fault has been out for at least a
>> year, so how come RS Components sold me an earlier revision?
>>
>
> So I take it that "winge" is Australian for "rant", right?



Yep, moan = whinge = bitch = complain = rant which are all completely 
different to "get a dog up ya"



>
> -- 
> Regards, Joerg
>
> http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads