Tweaking Jon W.'s code

ERM

Hi guys (and gals),

I am trying to reapply Jon Williams' sequencer.bs2 code where he has entered data into the EEPROM data section. That data looks like this:

'

---

[noparse][[/noparse] EEPROM Data ]

---

RecLen CON 3 ' 3 bytes per record

ZigZag DATA Word %0000000010000000, 2
DATA Word %0000000101000000, 2
DATA Word %0000001000100000, 2
DATA Word %0000010000010000, 2
DATA Word %0000100000001000, 2
DATA Word %0001000000000100, 2
DATA Word %0010000000000010, 2
DATA Word %0100000000000001, 2
DATA Word %0010000000000010, 2
DATA Word %0001000000000100, 2
DATA Word %0000100000001000, 2
DATA Word %0000010000010000, 2
DATA Word %0000001000100000, 2
DATA Word %0000000101000000, 2
DATA Word %0000000010000000, 2
DATA Word %0000000000000000, 0

Now, rearranging this data, can this format be used in single lines of code instead of writing it into the EEPROM. (i.e.

%0100000000000001, 2

Instead of writing:

high 0
pause 200
low 0

I know the above %000...1, 2 code does not work, but can it be rewritten to work to refrain from using the latter code saving space?

Thanks,
Tony

Jon Williams

If there was an easier (or more code-efficient) way to implement a sequencer, Tony, I would have published it -- trust me, I've done a lot of work with this stuff. Each record in the table represents two separate items: the pins value, and the duration to hold those pins, and you cannot deal with both items in a single line of code.

The beauty of this kind of sequencer is that you can adjust the sequence without ever making adjustments to the "engine" itself.

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Jon Williams
Applications Engineer, Parallax

Gadgetman

The ONLY way to compact it would be if you separated the Pin-data and the delay into two tables, and used nibbles instead of Bytes to store the delay.

BUT... That would probably make for a more complex code which takes more EEPROM space and executes slower...
(Not to mention, is much more difficult to read...

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Don't visit my new website...

Jon Williams

Exactly -- and I actually send the timing value to a routine that [noparse][[/noparse]typically] uses 0.1 second increments (we don't need one millisecond resolution fro prop control).

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Jon Williams
Applications Engineer, Parallax