Looking for Microcontroller Recommendations
in [Design]
|
From: Nico Coesel on 16 Jan 2010 18:06 "Tim Williams" <tmoranwms(a)charter.net> wrote: >"Nico Coesel" <nico(a)puntnl.niks> wrote in message >news:4b520c58.595258812(a)news.planet.nl... >> That is not a PIC. That is a PIC32! A whole different beast. If you >> like your sanity, I wouldn't program those in assembly though (google >> 'MIPS one delay slot'). > >That's a neat feature. Wikipedia says most assemblers baby you though. > >If delay slots are hard for you, you must've never written 8086 assembler. Back in the old days I wrote a lot of 8086 assembly. Actually I wrote some x86 assembler recently. At least the x86 executes the instructions in the order you write them. The problem with the one-delay slot on MIPS is that the program is not executed in the order you write it. It is something which is easely overlooked and makes the code hard to read. Especially if you are not programming MIPS assembly on a daily basis. IOW a software maintenance nightmare. -- Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply indicates you are not using the right tools... nico(a)nctdevpuntnl (punt=.) --------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nico Coesel on 16 Jan 2010 18:46 Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On a sunny day (Sat, 16 Jan 2010 19:02:30 GMT) it happened nico(a)puntnl.niks >(Nico Coesel) wrote in <4b520c58.595258812(a)news.planet.nl>: > >>Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP(a)interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote: >> >>>On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 11:35:49 GMT, the renowned nico(a)puntnl.niks (Nico >>>Coesel) wrote: >>> >>>>"RogerN" <regor(a)midwest.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>>Thanks for all the fantastic recommendations! It seems like for many of the >>>>>microcontrollers it doesn't cost much to get going at a hobby level. I >>>>>ordered a PIC18 something starter kit that comes with a PICkit2 >>>>>programmer/debugger and I ordered a PICkit3 Debug Express. >>>> >>>>But be advised: as soon as you think 'I need 2 PICs for this project' >>>>it is time to dump the PIC and learn to use a completely different >>>>microcontroller. For more complicated projects using a PIC is like >>>>eating soup with chopsticks. PIC gets you started real fast but it >>>>also runs out of air real fast. >>> >>>What applications have you had to implement where a 40-80 MHz 32-bit >>>MIPS processor with 512M of flash is so woefully inadequate? >> >>That is not a PIC. That is a PIC32! A whole different beast. If you >>like your sanity, I wouldn't program those in assembly though (google >>'MIPS one delay slot'). > >Sice when is a PIC32 not a PIC, >of course it is. Because Microchip says so? PIC32 is Microchip's answer to the many ARM devices flooding the market these days. They simply want a piece of the action. It is a neat marketing trick to say a PIC32 is like a PIC16/18 but in reality a PIC32 is very similar to any ARM based microcontroller. Only Microchip decided to use a MIPS cpu instead of an ARM cpu. Its a good thing though that Microchip didn't try to invent yet another proprietary instruction set. Now you can use plain GCC (from sourceforgery for example) and Eclipse to get started. -- Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply indicates you are not using the right tools... nico(a)nctdevpuntnl (punt=.) --------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nico Coesel on 16 Jan 2010 18:53 krw <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: >On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 20:36:41 +0100, Falk Willberg ><Faweglassenlk(a)falk-willberg.de> wrote: > >>RogerN wrote: >>... >>> That would be a nice microcontroller project, use a temperature >>> sensor and RTCC, if it's freezing out, start the car so many minutes before >>> the end of shift, the colder it is, the more warm up time is allowed. >> >>Are you really going to waste 50% gas by blowing warm air (and harmful >>gases) out of the exhaust, torture the engine by running it cold and >>idle for minutes? > >50%? The car isn't "tortured" by running it at idle. OTOH, it isn't >good running a car at high speed until it's warmed some. The car >needs to be started anyway. It may "waste" a little gas by idling a >*little* longer than normal. > >>Why not use an auxiliary heater and control this with a micro? >>That would be a smart approach. > >With what are you going to power this "heater". Electricity (from >where?) rather than waste heat? There are special heaters for this purpose. They heat the engine coolant and can also heat the interior. Ofcourse they use fuel but it is a lot better than letting the engine run idle. http://www.webasto.us/home/en/homepage.html -- Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply indicates you are not using the right tools... nico(a)nctdevpuntnl (punt=.) --------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jan Panteltje on 16 Jan 2010 19:02 On a sunny day (Sat, 16 Jan 2010 23:46:17 GMT) it happened nico(a)puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote in <4b52475b.610359265(a)news.planet.nl>: >Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>On a sunny day (Sat, 16 Jan 2010 19:02:30 GMT) it happened nico(a)puntnl.niks >>(Nico Coesel) wrote in <4b520c58.595258812(a)news.planet.nl>: >> >>>Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP(a)interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote: >>> >>>>On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 11:35:49 GMT, the renowned nico(a)puntnl.niks (Nico >>>>Coesel) wrote: >>>> >>>>>"RogerN" <regor(a)midwest.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Thanks for all the fantastic recommendations! It seems like for many of the >>>>>>microcontrollers it doesn't cost much to get going at a hobby level. I >>>>>>ordered a PIC18 something starter kit that comes with a PICkit2 >>>>>>programmer/debugger and I ordered a PICkit3 Debug Express. >>>>> >>>>>But be advised: as soon as you think 'I need 2 PICs for this project' >>>>>it is time to dump the PIC and learn to use a completely different >>>>>microcontroller. For more complicated projects using a PIC is like >>>>>eating soup with chopsticks. PIC gets you started real fast but it >>>>>also runs out of air real fast. >>>> >>>>What applications have you had to implement where a 40-80 MHz 32-bit >>>>MIPS processor with 512M of flash is so woefully inadequate? >>> >>>That is not a PIC. That is a PIC32! A whole different beast. If you >>>like your sanity, I wouldn't program those in assembly though (google >>>'MIPS one delay slot'). >> >>Sice when is a PIC32 not a PIC, >>of course it is. > >Because Microchip says so? It is even spelled 'PIC'32 >PIC32 is Microchip's answer to the many ARM >devices flooding the market these days. They simply want a piece of >the action. It is a neat marketing trick to say a PIC32 is like a >PIC16/18 but in reality a PIC32 is very similar to any ARM based >microcontroller. Only Microchip decided to use a MIPS cpu instead of >an ARM cpu. Its a good thing though that Microchip didn't try to >invent yet another proprietary instruction set. Now you can use plain >GCC (from sourceforgery for example) and Eclipse to get started. Well, I sort of like the PIC16 - PIC12 instruction set, although too many bank switching instructions make the asm bigger. It is a good instruction set, and it works. It seems the open source sdcc C compiler can output PIC16 and some PIC18 code too. I am now doing 8052 code with it. I may or may not try to target some PIC with it some day, just to see what code it generates, I use gpasm for PICs now. PIC is nice to program in my view. Small micros should be programmed in asm. But the micros get bigger all the time.
From: Nico Coesel on 16 Jan 2010 19:57
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On a sunny day (Sat, 16 Jan 2010 23:46:17 GMT) it happened nico(a)puntnl.niks >(Nico Coesel) wrote in <4b52475b.610359265(a)news.planet.nl>: > >>Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>>On a sunny day (Sat, 16 Jan 2010 19:02:30 GMT) it happened nico(a)puntnl.niks >>>(Nico Coesel) wrote in <4b520c58.595258812(a)news.planet.nl>: >>> >>>>Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP(a)interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 11:35:49 GMT, the renowned nico(a)puntnl.niks (Nico >>>>>Coesel) wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>"RogerN" <regor(a)midwest.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Thanks for all the fantastic recommendations! It seems like for many of the >>>>>>>microcontrollers it doesn't cost much to get going at a hobby level. I >>>>>>>ordered a PIC18 something starter kit that comes with a PICkit2 >>>>>>>programmer/debugger and I ordered a PICkit3 Debug Express. >>>>>> >>>>>>But be advised: as soon as you think 'I need 2 PICs for this project' >>>>>>it is time to dump the PIC and learn to use a completely different >>>>>>microcontroller. For more complicated projects using a PIC is like >>>>>>eating soup with chopsticks. PIC gets you started real fast but it >>>>>>also runs out of air real fast. >>>>> >>>>>What applications have you had to implement where a 40-80 MHz 32-bit >>>>>MIPS processor with 512M of flash is so woefully inadequate? >>>> >>>>That is not a PIC. That is a PIC32! A whole different beast. If you >>>>like your sanity, I wouldn't program those in assembly though (google >>>>'MIPS one delay slot'). >>> >>>Sice when is a PIC32 not a PIC, >>>of course it is. >> >>Because Microchip says so? > >It is even spelled 'PIC'32 > >>PIC32 is Microchip's answer to the many ARM >>devices flooding the market these days. They simply want a piece of >>the action. It is a neat marketing trick to say a PIC32 is like a >>PIC16/18 but in reality a PIC32 is very similar to any ARM based >>microcontroller. Only Microchip decided to use a MIPS cpu instead of >>an ARM cpu. Its a good thing though that Microchip didn't try to >>invent yet another proprietary instruction set. Now you can use plain >>GCC (from sourceforgery for example) and Eclipse to get started. > >Well, I sort of like the PIC16 - PIC12 instruction set, >although too many bank switching instructions make the asm bigger. >It is a good instruction set, and it works. >It seems the open source sdcc C compiler can output PIC16 and some PIC18 code too. >I am now doing 8052 code with it. For 8051 and PIC you kinda need a commercial C compiler if you want to do some serious work. Keil's C compiler produces excellent code for the 8051. Hi-tech (9.6) tries to do so for PIC but gets lost every now and then. Even the command line options don't work properly. I've used SDCC many years ago but the result wheren't impressive. It did a whole lot better than Dave Dunfield's C compiler (V3.14) though. AFAIK SDCC has improved optimisations since then so you might be in for a pleasant surprise. >I may or may not try to target some PIC with it some day, >just to see what code it generates, I use gpasm for PICs now. >PIC is nice to program in my view. >Small micros should be programmed in asm. Like soup should be eaten with chop-sticks? Even small micro's should have a proper instruction set that is easy to deal with by a C compiler. Like the Renesas's H8 or TI's MSP430. BTW, the new Cortex M0 and M3 devices do not need a single line of assembly to startup. Also pushing & popping registers when handling an interrupt is done entirely in hardware. Thats really neat! I left the 8051 and similar micros long ago. Way too much hassle with bank switching, pages, different memory areas. I want to get work done not tinker with archaic architectures. -- Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply indicates you are not using the right tools... nico(a)nctdevpuntnl (punt=.) -------------------------------------------------------------- |