NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 18:49:28 -0600
From: "John Fields"
References: <3DFCDCB1.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <3DFD067C.email@example.com>
Subject: Re: Digital circuit help needed
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 18:50:46 -0800
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
"Fred Bloggs" wrote in message
> As usual, you're acting like a dumbass, like you're too damned dumb to
> admit the possibility of break-before-make or vice versa. That
> particular circuit is so damned fast, he could load the full pattern
> before even a reed dropped out that shouldn't, so your low-brained
> criticisms are asinine in that respect. And it is an easy parallel port
> interface if that's what he's using- looks like 6 writes to me. The OP
> knows what he wants, so he can adapt the operation to whatever he wants.
> He doesn't need some low-life like you telling him what to do.
Well, Robert, at least on this end its a dumbass "act"; on your end it's
You remind me of a drowning man desperately grabbing at anything to keep
from going under with that pussy speed excuse. Learn to swim, asshole.
Oh, BTW... Just as an aside, let's see you come up with some fanciful way to
justify your 4 chip garbage solution when a 2 chip solution is available,
> > All of Spehro's suggestions will allow the circuit to be implemented
> > successfully, with
> ...not interested in the mundane.
And yet, that's all you post...
Oh wait, I'm sorry. I was wrong. You also post the ridiculous. This most
recent "solution" of yours being a case in point.
> > being my favorite and what I use all the time.
> Like "my favorite" is some kind of stamp of approval? -You CAN'T be
Of course it is. Of course I am. I've used it many times, it's cheap, easy
to implement, and it _always_ works. Laugh if you like, but if you put your
way up against mine I'll have the last laugh. Again.
Just think about it in terms of the extra money that would have to be spent,
in terms of hardware and PCB real estate to implement your "solution", and
I'm sure that someone with your analytical capabilities couldn't help but
come to the conclusion that your way sucks.
Professional circuit designer