The UK Home Automation Archive

Archive Home
Group Home
Search Archive


Advanced Search

The UKHA-ARCHIVE IS CEASING OPERATIONS 31 DEC 2024


[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fw: error checking +Instance Question


  • Subject: Re: Fw: error checking +Instance Question
  • From: John B
  • Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 22:13:00 +0000

Hi Frank,

> > Just doing some error checking on the pic/osd and was wondering
if
> > one of the options was spelt incorrectly in the message should
the whole
> > message be discarded or the default setting used for that option
.....At
> the
> > moment if say i receive colum=**....it will default to column 5
since the
> n
> > is missing ...is this correct ??? or should it be discarded ??

I think column is an optional element, so if it were spelled incorrectly,
I'm
guessing you should treat it as if it wasn't there, and use the default
column
value, which sounds like what you've done.

If it was a mandatory item that was spelled incorrectly, then I guess you'd
have
to reject the message, but as column is optional, I don't think rejecting
the
message is necessary.

> > Also is it possible to make the reconfigurables ie instance a
fixed number
> > of characters....What im going to try and do is...rewrite the
instance in
> my
> > program memory table and this would make it a lot easier than
jumping in
> and
> > out of tables..would also copy new configs to eeprom ..

Instances can be between 1 and 16 bytes long.
So I guess you could allocate a fixed 16 bytes and just use zero padding
for
instances that are under 16 bytes?

Regards,

John






xPL Main Index | xPL Thread Index | xPL Home | Archives Home

Comments to the Webmaster are always welcomed, please use this contact form . Note that as this site is a mailing list archive, the Webmaster has no control over the contents of the messages. Comments about message content should be directed to the relevant mailing list.