No. In lots and lots of minds.
That is why companies with "secure" equipment do not want untrustworthy employees playing with their computers.
It's not as threat. It's what I intend to do. You have been hostile and rude without any provocation. Most forums, especially manufacture supported, do not tolerate that for very long.
I hold you to this.
Saying your computer is secure, and me correcting you is rude?
Whatever? What does any of this have to do with my original post?
If you have a secure computer, the ports would be blocked, and all attempts at comms would fail. Why did I need to explain this to you? Are you reporting me for telling you this?
Who defines what secure is?
I explained how our engineering computers are secured. I also acknowledged it probably not up to military standards.
Not you. Thankfully.
It's not my design or responsibility. I am not in the IT department. I have some restrictions that I find minor in performing my work. I'm not complaining about it at all. I work with what I have.
If you look closer my so called threat in post #18 was not even directed at you.
Why would you threaten anyone on this forum? Why not leave the fantasy at '("work")' and stick to the resolution of your desired topic? I'm cool with that. Not the other stuff.
Not concerned.
Now I know it is not secure. "Security is everyone's responsibility." You signed the NDA... or didn't because...
Because camsysca posted a belittling response in #16. If you read through this no real solution was reached. Cansysca just assumed a CR or LF was always being sent. That may be the case with Serial Monitor or some terminal applications but not the ones I generally use.
No need for such a terse response.
The folks on here spend so much time on solving "your" problems, that when "ghosting" (you kids use this word a lot) becomes a regular issue, then "muting" happens, and no one listens. Nobody belittled you. He is, always, factual.
It is about your history of non-reply. You sleep in the bed you make.
What are you talking about? I use the systems as I am permitted. I once tried a CDROM and asked It why it didn't work. They explained the specific USB port restrictions and did offer to inspect and load the application if it met their security and licensing policies?
What dos NDA have to do with any of this? How do you know I signed an NDA or not? And if I did, how am I violating it? Typing in a simple block of code. We do this all the time.
I do not doubt you. They are not secure.
Somewhere in your stacks of clicked CBT was your esig on an NDA.
I know a lot of stuff.
Didn't you read it before you signed it?
Yikes.
I don't always reply because the issue may not be resolved yet. I juggle several projects. Is this not an information forum? What rules am I violating? I'm not a kid either.
If you don't like the topics I post then simply don't respond. There are what, at least thousands of members here?
If somebody in authority here wants to explain this forum's policies, I will gladly listen and adapt. But not from public members with a chip on their shoulder.
Andy_ee as a handle implies a thought machine is available, so we can dispense with treating you like a public school student.
Listen up, I'll try one more time. Serial Monitor is sending '1' and CR when you hit send. Serial immediately queues the '1' in buffer on interrupt, whether you fiddle about with registers or not. All you might get lucky enough to see is the CR. Your continued struggles with serial mostly relate to not simply using the bulletproof, time-tested mechanisms already provided. Instead, ask Serial if something is available in queue, and evaluate that.
None. Extend courtesy to those taking time to help you. Not me. I was pointing out your possible problem of using a "secure" computer... which it is not... so you have no problem. Maybe don't over-classify your work, and people won't notice.
You clicked past them in the CBT to get your account.
Knowledge of security is a chip on a shoulder?
Cansysca,
OK, so Serial Monitor sends extra characters. That would explain the problem. And As I stated that won't be an issue in the final product. You could have commented further with another idea or your experiences rather than your terse response. Or just moved on.
I'll give you a little more background. I have 25+ years of experience with Atmel processors, before that Z80 and he 8051 family. I just started using Arduino as it has some great libraries as well as a good support community - or so I assumed.
This application started out on Arduino and over the past two weeks was ported back to a raw development system where I have complete control of the processor behavior. I have three nested timed interrupts. The problem with Arduino is these baked in functions that use interrupts. "Blind interrupts" as I call them. I have no idea how they are setting registers and where they are leaving things after execution. That is a problem.
For example I need to poll a timer inside a loop inside an interrupt. Therefore I need to use the timer without interrupts. The Arduino timer routines seem to all use interrupts. In fact I remember something in the documentation warning about that. So Arduino was not a good choice for this project. I am still using Arduino code in one sub processor as it works OK.
Let's be realistic. To spite it's use in some professional applications, the ARduino is a hobbyist learning platform. It's designed to shield the complexities of direct register manipulation. But for more advanced applications, that can be an issue. Same goes for optimizing compilers which Arduino proudly uses.
If you don't like my posts then just ignore them. In fact most forum software has the ability to ignore members you don't want to hear from.
There you go again.