So you found mistakes in documentation, grow up, they happen all the time and I bet any documentation or software you will produce will have mistakes in. What matters is corrective action.
I have seen many occurences, from one piece of bad documentation meant it was possible to fry chips in certain modes, to another where I gave lengthy feedback and the datasheet was updated with an ADDITIONAL 12 pages and other corrections made.
Often it is better to work WITH people than against them.
--
Paul Carpenter | paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk
PC Services
Raspberry Pi Add-ons
Timing Diagram Font
For those web sites you hate
Yep. I've found mistakes in documentation for almost all the parts I've ever used. Some of the user manuals are 1000+ pages long: of course there are mistakes. I've found mistakes in the parts themselves quite a few times as well. It sometimes takes a long time to convince the vendor that something's wrong with a part, but in my experience they'll come around provided detailed evidence.
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Everybody is going
at somewhere!! It's probably
gmail.com a garage sale or a disaster
Movie!!
On January 5th, 2016, Paul Carpenter sent: |-----------------------------------------------------------------------| |"[. . .] | | | |So you found mistakes in documentation, grow up, they happen all the | |time and I bet any documentation or software you will produce will have| |mistakes in. What matters is corrective action. | | | |I have seen many occurences, from one piece of bad documentation meant | |it was possible to fry chips in certain modes, to another where I gave | |lengthy feedback and the datasheet was updated with an ADDITIONAL 12 | |pages and other corrections made. | | | |Often it is better to work WITH people than against them. | | | |-- | |Paul Carpenter | snipped-for-privacy@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk " | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
During the previous decade I reported a mistake in documentation to STMicroelectronics therefore instead of deciding to simply add a correction, STMicroelectronics threatened to sue us. Grow up.
Thy sincerely, Paul Colin Gloster
Can you post the letter? Exactly what did they want to sue you for? Was there a confidentiality agreement that would have been abrogated?
-- Rick
STM threatened to sue you for reporting an STM documentation error to STM? That's a little hard to believe...
Or did you show to world+dog something from a confidential document that was provided to you under an NDA? I can understand how that might provoke a letter from the lawyers.
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! HOORAY, Ronald!!
at Now YOU can marry LINDA
gmail.com RONSTADT too!!
On January 5th, 2016, Grant Edwards sent: |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"On 2016-01-05, Nicholas Collin Paul de Gloucester wrote:| | | |> During the previous decade I reported a mistake in documentation to | |> STMicroelectronics therefore instead of deciding to simply add a | |> correction, STMicroelectronics threatened to sue us. Grow up. | | | |STM threatened to sue you for reporting an STM documentation error to | |STM?" | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Precisely.
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"That's a little hard to believe..." | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
It really happened.
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"Or did you show to world+dog something from a confidential document | |that was provided to you under an NDA?" | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
No. This error was provided to me under an NDA and I reported it to STMicroelectronics without violating this NDA.
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"I can understand how that | |might provoke a letter from the lawyers. | | | |-- | |Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! HOORAY, Ronald!! | |at Now YOU can marry LINDA | |gmail.com RONSTADT too!!" | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Thou hast more understanding than STMicroelectronics demonstrated this time.
Regards, Paul Colin Gloster
What exactly was a threat about? Are you sure it wasn't a protective order rather than a threat of a law suit?
-- Rick
On January 5th, 2016, Rickman sent: |-------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"Can you post the letter?" | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Hi:
No - it was a telephone call to a then boss.
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"Exactly what did they want to sue you for?" | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
NDA so-called violation but STMicroelectronics did not get very far with this because there was no NDA violation.
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"Was | |there a confidentiality agreement that would have been abrogated? | | | |-- | | | |Rick" | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
There was an NDA in force at the time. It went out of force many years later.
Regards, Paul Colin Gloster
Ok, so an over-zealous lawyer called your boss and said something about not violating an NDA. What were they saying *was* a violation or what were they *warning* you about?
So far none of this makes much sense, mostly because you keep leaving out important information, the crux of the matter.
-- Rick
On January 5th, 2016, Rickman sent: |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"On 1/5/2016 1:17 PM, Nicholas Collin Paul de Gloucester wrote: | |> On January 5th, 2016, Rickman sent: | |> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|| |> |"Can you post the letter?" || |> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|| |> | |> Hi: | |> | |> No - it was a telephone call to a then boss. | |> | |> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|| |> |"Exactly what did they want to sue you for?" || |> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|| |> | |> NDA so-called violation but STMicroelectronics did not get very far | |> with this because there was no NDA violation. | |> | |> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|| |> |"Was || |> |there a confidentiality agreement that would have been abrogated? || |> | || |> |-- || |> | || |> |Rick" || |> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|| |> | |> There was an NDA in force at the time. It went out of force many years | |> later. | | | |Ok, so an over-zealous lawyer" | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
He was not a lawyer.
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"called your boss and said something about not | |violating an NDA. What were they saying *was* a violation" | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
I was told that he incorrectly supposedly asserted that we had this document by violating an NDA.
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"or what were they | |*warning* you about? | | | |So far none of this makes much sense, mostly because you keep leaving out | |important information, the crux of the matter. | | | |-- | | | |Rick" | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
What STMicroelectronics did did not make sense. The crux of this matter is that STMicroelectronics was too lacking of intelligence to be an engineering company.
Regards, Paul Colin Gloster
Except in a different sub-thread, you state that the phone call was about your possession of a confidential document that STM didn't think you should have. That's a bit different than threatening to sue you for reporting a documentation error.
I'm not saying that the phone call wasn't in error, but is it possible they were calling because they thought you didn't have the proper NDA in place to posess the document rather than because you reported a mistake?
[Is there any way you can turn off the ASCII-box-drawing stuff for quoted content and quote things the normal way? The box makes it hard to re-flow quoted material.]
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Give them RADAR-GUIDED
at SKEE-BALL LANES and
gmail.com VELVEETA BURRITOS!!
How many work for STM, 10,000 maybe 20,000? So one guy jumped a gun and accused you of violating an agreement and you think that means the entire STM company should be shunned?
You still haven't provided all the relevant information and what you say is not clear. If the guy was not a lawyer what was his position? Surely he identified himself before launching into an accusation? Did he explain what he meant by you violated an NDA by "having" the document? If your "having" the document was a problem then it was someone else who violated the NDA by giving it to you.
-- Rick
Actually lone crusaders with very little circumstantial evidence, time for something I do rarely killfile a user.
--
Paul Carpenter | paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk
PC Services
Raspberry Pi Add-ons
Timing Diagram Font
For those web sites you hate
People are writing RTOSes for 8-bit platforms, so I guess there are people wanting to use them. So if I want a reasonably complete toolchain for those platforms to exist, some RTOSes should be ported to free compilers.
Philipp
Why not ?
If you just have less than 10 KiB of code and a single programmer, some simple state machines would be enough.
With tens of KiB of code or multiple programmers, the project management with a pre-emptive RTOS simplifies a lot. I have used small pre-emptive kernels at least for 8080/8085/6502/6809.
Preemptive opens up a lot of disparate and ugly cans of worms. With "run to completion". you can get a lot closer to proving the system correct to within some epsilon ( sometimes a rather large epsilon ).
The only thing preemptive gets you is if somebody's thread is taking too long, you jerk the CPU away from them. Well, maybe you really want that to be an exception rather than a context switch.
"Mulitple programmers" is more about configuration management discipline, unit and integration testing than architecture anyway.
-- Les Cargill
Note that there is a middle way between pre-emptive (with the nice can of worms labeled '(absence of) mutual exclusion errors') and run-to-competion (with the headache pills labeled 'where do I store my context'): cooperative.
Wouter van Ooijen
Without preemption, how are you going to combine sporadic or periodic short, urgent computations, with longer, less urgent computations? By using interrupt handlers (i.e. pre-emption of a sort) for all the urgent stuff? Or by manually slicing the longer computations into short "run to (intermediate) completion" steps? The latter leads to a real mess, IMO.
--
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
. @ .
And no 6800 or HC11? Come on :-).
The first MT kernel I wrote was for the 6809... maintained a bitmap of memory clusters to allocate/deallocate on dynamic requests by tasks (there was no need for that but I was doing what I thought was interesting to do...). My second one was 68020, a one-off thingie which I did for my then employer in Cologne (late 80-s).
Oops, I never wrote a 6800 kernel really :D. Just a HC11 - no dynamic RAM allocation of its 512 bytes though...
I never touched a 6502/80xx part though.
Dimiter
------------------------------------------------------ Dimiter Popoff, TGI
------------------------------------------------------
Not really if you know what you are doing. Processors have user and supervisor levels for a reason, there is nothing special about switching user level tasks without them needing to know it (i.e. preemptively). Can be useful under severe system load and is definitely a remedy against poorly written code which tries to hog the system for no good reason. And even for good code for good reason, say computationally intensive tasks - they don't have to bother how much system time they take, just get on with it while the system takes care of the scheduling.
Dimiter
------------------------------------------------------ Dimiter Popoff, TGI
------------------------------------------------------
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.