| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
e34m5
Joined: 14 Oct 2003
Posts: 675
Location: Atlanta
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2003 1:56 pm Post subject: 6012 extender |
 |
|
| Is there a limit to how many steps are allowed in a macro using the extender.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
johnsfine
Site Admin
Joined: 10 Aug 2003
Posts: 4766
Location: Bedford, MA
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2003 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
With or without an extender a macro is limited to 15 steps, but some extenders let you nest or concatenate macros, in which case you can create a macro that will execute an unlimited number of steps.
Each extender that allows nested macros has a limit on pending steps. You should look at the extender documentation for details. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
usblipitor
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 516
Location: Greenbelt, MD
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2003 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here is an excerpt from the extender documentation that john refers to:
| "The Extender Documentation that John Refers To" wrote: | There is a 32 byte macro buffer (vs. the 15 byte buffer used by SelNestMac on other remotes). That doesn't change the limit on an individual macro (still 15 commands) nor does it set a limit on the total number of commands executed by one macro (virtually unlimited). It limits the number of commands "pending" at any one moment.
To understand "pending" commands, imagine 4 macros, A, B, C, and D:
A = B; C; D
B = 1; 2; 3
C = 4; B; 5; 6
D = 7; 8; 9
when you press A, you get 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9, which is 12 commands, but
in executing those 12 commands, there were never 12 commands "pending".
When the extender processes the first B there are 5 command pending:
1; 2; 3; C; D;
Later it process the C and there are again 5 commands pending:
4; B; 5; 6; D
When it processes the second B there are 6 commands pending
1; 2; 3; 5; 6; D
The whole 12 commands are sent with a maximum of 6 ever pending. You should be able to design rediculously long macros without ever hitting the limit of 32 pending commands. |
_________________
-Steve
Beginner's Guide
CodeSearchFAQ
JP1Files |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e34m5
Joined: 14 Oct 2003
Posts: 675
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2003 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I guess I must be tired..I read that and it didn't register...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nils_Ekberg
Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2003
Posts: 1689
Location: Near Albany, NY
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2003 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| e34m5 wrote: | | I guess I must be tired..I read that and it didn't register... |
It is a tough read. I remember the first 30 or 40 times I read it. Basically what it says is that no one macro can have more than 15 steps (extended or unextended) but with an extender you can imbed (nested) macros within macros, all of which can have 15 steps each which could lead to ultimately over 200 steps to be executed by one primary macro. So, 15 is is not the real limit. The limit is how big the macro buffer is and how quick steps are processed through the buffer. On an extended remote the buffer it is generally anywhere between 15 and 31 bytes (steps). Since the buffer steps run immediately as it receives input it is very difficult for the 200+ steps to all arrive in the buffer at the same time since they are sent to the buffer in order of process. When a nested macro is sent it is not actually all of the commands in that macro being sent until it is executed by the command processor.
I hope that made more sense.
_________________
Nils
Files Section
Diagnosis File Section |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
File Section
Wiki
