I'm really not into this matter, I haven't had a single look at the library itself. So sorry for commenting parts of it, but in that code I had done something a bit differently.
> [...] > i = i + 1 > if ((i == max_crc_errors) & (GOOD_crc == 1)) then > exit loop > end if > until GOOD_crc == 0 I think this is a quite complicated implementation of something like [...] i = i + 1 until ( GOOD_crc == 0 ) | ( i == max_crc_errors ) And, GOOD_crc is not checked after the loop. So bad readings are processed just the same way as good readings. Only the probability to have a good reading is increased. That should not be the goal, I think. Greets, Kiste -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.
