Page 1 of 1

A little cosmetic mistake. PIC32MZ (Solved)

Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:51 pm
by Lagoda
Hello Ben,

I installed version 7.3.0.7 and after that I noticed this.
The names of the ports are incorrect.jpg
The names of the ports are incorrect.jpg (137 KiB) Viewed 6219 times
Best Regards,

Lagoda

Re: A little cosmetic mistake. PIC32MZ

Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:08 am
by Benj
Hi Lagoda,

I've just tried 7.3.0.6 here with that target chip and it looks the same to me, what were you expecting to see? The Input and Output icons can only use the ports in 8-bit mode. The full 16-bit ports can be accessed via the port functions in the calculation icon.

Re: A little cosmetic mistake. PIC32MZ

Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2018 12:31 pm
by Lagoda
Hi Ben,

I think this tag is more logical for 16-bit ports (H and L) than the PIC32 example.
That's why I wrote a cosmetic mistake.
PORTS.jpg
PORTS.jpg (82.8 KiB) Viewed 6199 times
If the ports of the PIC32 family are deliberately marked on this way, this is fine for me.
But why do you use two types of marking within Flowcode?

Best Regards,

Lagoda

Re: A little cosmetic mistake. PIC32MZ

Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2018 12:57 pm
by Benj
Hi Lagoda,

I think it's because Flowcode is treating it as a 32-bit device and assumes 32-bit ports. So L and H don't cut it and instead they are numbered 0-3 for the 4 bytes. 0 being the L byte.

I'll have a look and see if this is easy to fix as the ports on PIC32 are 16-bit max.

Maybe we need a separate processor bit depth and port bit depth options in the definition file.

Re: A little cosmetic mistake. PIC32MZ

Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2018 1:42 pm
by Lagoda
Hi Ben,

Once you have a lot of time ... :)

I just wanted to report it, it does not cause any problems.

Thank you very much for the answer.

Best Regards,

Lagoda