Re: [Amforth-devel] Interrupts in Forth

2010-09-26 Thread Al Williams
> And it works for all cases where the hardware does not need to be reset > to some "interrupt-handled" state. e.g. some interrupts need to be > cleared somehow (mostly by reading one or more bytes from pre-defined > IO registers). If that is _not_ done within the ISR, the interrupt will > re-fire

Re: [Amforth-devel] Interrupts in Forth

2010-09-26 Thread Matthias Trute
hi Al, > > Howeer, if you use int! to set a "Forth" interrupt vector, the default isr > sets the "T" flag when an interrupt trips. It also stores the current vector > in > a location where the interpreter can find it. > > When the interpreter is about to dispatch it looks to see if the T flag

Re: [Amforth-devel] Interrupts in Forth

2010-09-20 Thread pito
> Bad unless you have a way to keep a queue of > interrupts pending, for example > (which would be another neat project). yes, a queue e.g. 8 vectors deep, then you must not care on T - when q. not empty then int. has been fired, and forth will process them in an order.. mind latency of forth.. P.

[Amforth-devel] Interrupts in Forth

2010-09-19 Thread Al Williams
So I've been working with input capture interrupts today. I see that the UART interrupts don't use the "Forth" system -- they just reprogram the vector and use assembly. Howeer, if you use int! to set a "Forth" interrupt vector, the default isr sets the "T" flag when an interrupt trips. It also