On April 29, 2010 at 08:12, johnsfine said...
Is that the whole objective? Just improve the quality of learned signals that already work? Those learned signals look quite good. Improving them probably will make no difference.
I want to give our Crestron programmer a set of codes for him to use in a module. I see no reason to give him any codes that aren't perfect.
But if you do want to improve them, decodeCCF gave you the function number of each signal.
Exactly. My problem was doing the next step, and it looks like your direction will give me that. And I'll be sure to save the instructions.
MakeHex gives you 256 Pronto Hex strings labeled with function numbers. For each decoded signal, you could select the Pronto Hex string from the MakeHex output that has the same number and use that Pronto Hex string instead of the learned one.
In addition, one can try out the other codes to see what happens. I know this is messing with the possibility of service codes and such, but in a discussion long ago someone pointed out that you rarely get trapped in such a mode by pressing one button or a sequence of buttons arranged numerically in the hex list.
Usually MakeHex/IrPanels are used when you are searching for missing signals, so you take the whole set of 256 signals and test each one and see what it does.
Oh, yeah, that's what I meant above.
Thank you for the help.
