stryd_one

Yes, the crimping tool of justice...oh waits that's a hammer huh...nevermind ;D I heard that he does, but they aint on the store.

Hi guys, Good news, I have just tested a 15-bit bitfield (15, not 16, to test correct alignment of odd sizes across bytes), and all accesses are correct :) This was with a post 2.7.0 SDCC release. AC and I have been warning people of this limitation for years now, I had to add this info to lots of old threads which are used as references in the wiki and such. Ugh! Definition looks like this: typedef union { struct { unsigned ALL:15; } struct { unsigned test1:1; unsigned test2:1; unsigned test3:1; unsigned test4:1; unsigned test5:1; unsigned test6:1; unsigned test7:1; unsigned test8:1; unsigned test9:1; unsigned test10:1; unsigned test11:1; unsigned test12:1; unsigned test13:1; unsigned test14:1; unsigned test15:1; } } bitfield_t; I tested it by sending notes depending on the bits 6,7,8 and 14 (test7, test8, test9 and test15). More useless info brought to you by stryd_one ;D

Seriously, it's just as easy either way. Jump to phase 3 on this one. :)

For the record: Good news, I have just tested a 15-bit bitfield (15, not 16, to test correct alignment of odd sizes across bytes), and all accesses are correct :) This was with a post 2.7.0 SDCC release.

For the record: Good news, I have just tested a 15-bit bitfield (15, not 16, to test correct alignment of odd sizes across bytes), and all accesses are correct :) This was with a post 2.7.0 SDCC release.

For the record: Good news, I have just tested a 15-bit bitfield (15, not 16, to test correct alignment of odd sizes across bytes), and all accesses are correct :) This was with a post 2.7.0 SDCC release.

For the record: Good news, I have just tested a 15-bit bitfield (15, not 16, to test correct alignment of odd sizes across bytes), and all accesses are correct :) This was with a post 2.7.0 SDCC release.

LOL! But seriously though, it seems crazy to me, to dispense with hundreds of years of protocol, and start doing it a new way, because in some languages, they have the same letter at the start... I can't help but wonder if there is any logic to it but that? Perhaps it's the sheeple factor; one guy didn't know about red=left, did red=right, and everyone else did it because he did....

Good news, I have just tested a 15-bit bitfield (15, not 16, to test correct alignment of odd sizes across bytes), and all accesses are correct :) This was with a post 2.7.0 release.

I think the pink background above is a giveaway ;)

No idea sorry mate. I've seen them around, but they're rare as, and I think I've only ever seen basic black on green.

OK before I start, sorry about the flood of posts from me over the last days... I have just finished catching up with 22 pages of posts. You have no idea how glad I am to see that. nearly 500 posts in a row, ugh!!! Should be back to my normal ridiculous level of posts now ;) Aaaanyway, a question. When it comes to wiring audio etc: Red = Right or Red = Left Now, I'm not so much interested in how *you* do it (feel free to tell me anyway), I'm trying to find out if there is a *right* way. I know it doesn't make any difference and the electrons really don't care about the colour of the shielding, but it's one of these things I've always wondered about. I mean... historically speaking, it's always been red = port = left. Look at a boat or aircraft. And it's been that way for centuries.... And if we're talking about stereo, then left = red makes sense too because if a mono jack is inserted then only the left (red) wire is in use, and red is usually the 'active' wire in circuitry land, AFAIK.... But I know that most people, wire red=right. The only logic I can apply to that, is that they both start with 'R'. Can anyone shed light on this subject?

Sad but true... these days people have made it so that it is cheaper to use a fast chip to compensate for performance faults... so *most* of the time, the bad stuff is hidden.... Crappy, bloated, poorly engineered code on fast chips is the way of the future. It's the electronic equivalent of: guy: "my car is slow. the tyres are flat" tech: "install a bigger engine"

I suspected as much.... Thanks Roger :) [me=stryd_one]looks at his logitech MX revo and wonders if the flywheel gear could be misused...then remembers it's worth hundreds [/me] ;)

Time for a 'MIDIbox of the Week" post!

hehehehe I think that the name of this thread just serves as inspiration to those who fear starting a midibox project :)

Good call man, I was thinking the same today... For example what If I search for 'smashtv'........

Well, I see what happened: You tried to send an email, but your computer caught fire, so you tried to make smoke signals, and the smoke choked the pigeon. It's a shame the source of the 'icecubes' is gone because they were very popular...but maybe one day if someone wants to make a run of custom buttons they will serve as inspiration.

non-contact faders: search the forum. sample friendly suppliers of: dream on.

Well, I don't know... There are these forums for helping out, in various languages.... and provided you can read English (no need to speak/write it) there is a great deal of good documentation... With no experience at all it will be harder, but if you are dedicated and respectful toward the community I think anyone can do a midibox.

3.5 years old... and I thought I had resurrected some old threads today! phew! xarolium: I haven't seen LO in a looong time :( But yes, a 4x40 generally works *exactly* like a pair of 2x40's - it even has two enable lines. Only difference is that they are in one unit, and they share the data backlight and power lines.

You mean, the ones that are clearly labelled as being the maplin keyswitches? ;D

"...and this is Sahira" ;D cimo, if you need threads split or merged into one, you know who to ask ;)

Sorry to play the resurrector of threads but... What are the chances of those of us with upload permissions, also having delete permissions? I understand it's a wiki, and that removing files completely might not work out, but maybe there's an invisibility tag or something?

Definitely! thankyou! :)