Prev: Poll: What additional features would you like to see for a forum in english of HP calculators?
Next: programming acronyms and Jazz
From: TW on 15 Apr 2010 08:42 > Interesting as the PDF documentation that comes with the 2.15 update > describes the "ON-F4, then ON-F3 followed by + & -" method. Is this > HP's official way? I don't know, in the PDF's properties, the only > reference is the author "wessman" ;). That is the easier/better way, but i suppose there is a reset button there for a reason. . . I've never seen this situation described and can't see how it is possible, but with a system this complex who knows. :-( TW
From: Gurveer on 15 Apr 2010 10:35 On Apr 15, 6:42 am, TW <timwess...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Interesting as the PDF documentation that comes with the 2.15 update > > describes the "ON-F4, then ON-F3 followed by + & -" method. Is this > > HP's official way? I don't know, in the PDF's properties, the only > > reference is the author "wessman" ;). > > That is the easier/better way, but i suppose there is a reset button > there for a reason. . . > > I've never seen this situation described and can't see how it is > possible, but with a system this complex who knows. :-( > > TW Holy freak!!! Thanks a lot Tim. I just tried it this morning and it did work. Awesome!!! You just saved me a couple hundred bucks...lol. I guess I did not have any problem using the reset hole and the + & - hold keys. At first, when I tried it, it just showed a dark line on the screen and I pulled the paper clip out expecting it to prompt for the initiation of the upgrade process which it did not. The next time I just kept it in for like 15 seconds with the mentioned keys held down and all of a sudden, it prompted me to update code. Now, it's all good. Thank you once again! Cheers!!! Gurveer
From: John H Meyers on 17 Apr 2010 22:59 Does disabling (hardware) interrupts prevent ON+x from working? [r->] [OFF]
From: Gurveer on 18 Apr 2010 04:07 On Apr 17, 8:59 pm, John H Meyers <jhmey...(a)nomail.invalid> wrote: > Does disabling (hardware) interrupts prevent ON+x from working? > > [r->] [OFF] I was kinda surprised at that behavior too. As long as the program was running as a global variable, ON+x interrupts were working just fine. But when that program was being executed as a $CONFIG for the library attachment on every warmstart. it would just not let me do anything. On + (+/-) were working to change the contrast of the screen though, surprisingly but none other combination except TTRC prompt which would just make the program to be executed no matter what you choose on that prompt were working including On+C, On+D, On+F, etc. I'm glad that reset trick saved my life...lol The same behavior was being observed on the emulator files. No matter if I saved or did not save the changes upon closing the emulator, it would just pop up again and again. I had to reinstall the Debug4x! Gurveer
From: Han on 20 Apr 2010 19:35
On Apr 18, 4:07 am, Gurveer <gurveer....(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 17, 8:59 pm, John H Meyers <jhmey...(a)nomail.invalid> wrote: > > > Does disabling (hardware) interrupts prevent ON+x from working? > > > [r->] [OFF] > > I was kinda surprised at that behavior too. As long as the program was > running as a global variable, ON+x interrupts were working just fine. > > But when that program was being executed as a $CONFIG for the library > attachment on every warmstart. it would just not let me do anything. I think this makes sense if the ROM is set up anything like the SX and GX. Running it from a global variable implicitly means the routine is being run in a controlled environment that traps key presses. If the code runs during "bootup" and in particular during the library configuring stage, there is no higher level of code that could trap key presses. So if your code disables interrupts and has its own keyboard handling routine, and there are no other higher layers of operation, it does not surprise me that this is the net effect of a bugged keyboard handler. |