Which uController to learn?
in [Design]
|
Prev: 1000V high side gate drive
Next: Micpre of Graham
From: DJ Delorie on 23 Mar 2007 14:41 krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> writes: > Huh? When does a customer request functionality from a compiler? When you write compilers for a living, as I do, and the customer is the one who created the chip you're targetting. They're usually the ones who pay for embedded development tools.
From: Anthony Fremont on 23 Mar 2007 15:28 John Barrett wrote: > "Anthony Fremont" <spam-not(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >> Speak for yourself. Since when is A/D resolution not important for >> an 8 bitter? >> > > AVR32 based 32-bit MCU/DSP > Vectored multiplier co-processor, 32 KB on-chip SRAM, 16 KB > instruction and 16 KB data caches, MMU, DMA controller. Peripherals > include a 16-bit stereo audio DAC, 2048x2048 pixel TFT/STN LCD > controllers, 480 Mbps USB 2.0 with on chip transceivers (PHY) and, > two 10/100 Ethernet MACs. Serial interfaces include RS232, USART, > I2S, AC97, TWI/I2C, SPI, PS/2 and several synchronous serial modules > (SSC) supporting most serial communication protocols. > sounds like a bit more than an 8-bitter to me !! Slightly. ;-) Sounds allot like an ARM knockoff. I wonder what the power dissipation is on that, I'm guessing it's a bit more than my slow, cumbersome PIC. I bet it costs more than a $1 too. ;-)
From: Terran Melconian on 23 Mar 2007 15:47 On 2007-03-23, Anthony Fremont <spam-not(a)nowhere.com> wrote: > 20 MIPS, on a MEGA. Those aren't backwards compatible with the tradition > AVRs are they? There's not much difference between them. The most significant is probably that the mega series has a hardware 8-bit MUL instruction which takes two clock cycles. I would not say that going from one series to the other necessitates any more modifications than going between parts in the same series. Maybe you were thinking of the AVR32?
From: phil-news-nospam on 23 Mar 2007 16:07 In alt.engineering.electrical Anthony Fremont <spam-not(a)nowhere.com> wrote: | jasen wrote: |> On 2007-03-16, Anthony Fremont <spam-not(a)nowhere.com> wrote: |>> TT_Man wrote: |>>>> As you said, PIC is king and it is for a reason, they work. |>>>> |>>> Only if you can get to grips with the appalling op code set..... OK |>>> if you can program in C , I suppose.I can't/won't |>> |>> I only do assembler on the PIC too. What's wrong with the op-code |>> set? It's RISC, |> |> no it's not, it has too few registers to qualify. | | By whose definition? It stands for Reduced Instruction Set. 35 | instructions is pretty reduced IMO. I guess some people thought RISC meant Registers In Surplus Capacity. |>> it has 35 instructions, it's not supposed to be luxurious. It's |>> supposed to be functional and fast....it succeeds. |> |> It always seemed kind of awkward and slow slow to me. | | Compared to what? 10MIPs on a few mA is pretty good in my book. I like that book. -- |---------------------------------------/----------------------------------| | Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below | | first name lower case at ipal.net / spamtrap-2007-03-23-1503(a)ipal.net | |------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|
From: jasen on 24 Mar 2007 03:54
On 2007-03-23, Anthony Fremont <spam-not(a)nowhere.com> wrote: > jasen wrote: >> On 2007-03-16, Anthony Fremont <spam-not(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >>> TT_Man wrote: >>>>> As you said, PIC is king and it is for a reason, they work. >>>>> >>>> Only if you can get to grips with the appalling op code set..... OK >>>> if you can program in C , I suppose.I can't/won't >>> >>> I only do assembler on the PIC too. What's wrong with the op-code >>> set? It's RISC, >> >> no it's not, it has too few registers to qualify. > > By whose definition? Pretty much everyones (with the exception of the PIC fans). google "what is risc" sometime. -- Bye. Jasen |