Eric Vickery wrote: > I disagree. 85 is a valid reading since the chip can read from -10 to You disagree with what...? If with "It's inconsequential in the scheme of things." I meant to say in the scheme of things in my software. It *may not* be inconsequential for engineers who are trying to work with the device. This last statement is yet to be shown true, IMHO. > +125 and nowhere in the spec document does it state that 85 cannot be a > valid reading. It just states that 85 is the power-on reset value. My guess is that discerning the POR value is done by comparing the returned value out to a certain precision. (In my code I just check for 85.0 which paints a broader bruch). For example 85.000 may well indicate POR whereas 85.125 would not, of course. I haven't worked it out.
This point may be worth a little math. Where is Dan Awtrey when you need him? :) > > I think it would have been better for Dallas to have the power-on value > something on the extreme high or low end to make it easier to tell when > an error occurred. I agree, but my guess is that that they chose this value because it's at the end of the chip's normally-designed range of -10 +85C. At this range the chip is good to 0.5 degrees C. Outside of this range the chip is good to +/- 2.0 degrees C which may be useful to only a few. /m ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Owfs-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/owfs-developers
