Prop-2 Official Name

13

Comments

  • I don't understand. What would an IDE have to do to make use of multiple cores easier?
  • cgracey wrote:
    The 'last propeller'? I wonder.
    Barring a masochistic streak, I suppose. :)

    At the very least, you should take a few years off when everything is in production and the software tools are written and documented. Don't even think about whether you'd want to do it again. At the end of your hiatus, you'll know.

    -Phil

    Rather than a complete hiatus it might actually be fun to work on some other Parallax products with shorter life cycles that could quickly generate revenue. Or dream up some projects based on your experiences with FPGAs or whatever, and do some brainstorming with Ken.
  • kwinn wrote:
    It may not limit you to a single core, but it does not do anything to make use of multiple cores easier either.
    Nor is it supposed to. That's a function of the language(s) it supports.

    -Phil
    “Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away. -Antoine de Saint-Exupery
  • samuellsamuell Posts: 143
    edited October 16 Vote Up0Vote Down
    kwinn wrote: »
    ...
    Programming in C is already in the works, but why cripple a multi core cpu with an IDE for a single core chip?
    Where did you get that idea? I've used PropellerIDE to program in C a multi-core application. Of course it was harder to do than a single core application, since core 0 is always there and implicit, and you don't need to refer to in most cases. A multi-core enabled program requires you to be more specific, but that doesn't have to do with the language or the implementation. It is simply necessary.
  • KeithE wrote: »
    Rather than a complete hiatus it might actually be fun to work on some other Parallax products with shorter life cycles that could quickly generate revenue. Or dream up some projects based on your experiences with FPGAs or whatever, and do some brainstorming with Ken.

    A Propeller controlled Taco Machine might be just the thing. Does Ken like tacos?
    Infantryman's Axiom; Always cheat, always win.
  • A Propeller controlled Taco Machine might be just the thing. Does Ken like tacos?

    I prefer chips over tacos any day. I'd eat a Propeller 2 if I could have one today.

    Ken Gracey

  • so we have a SIG of chip eaters
  • We had a "Propeller", perhaps it is now time for an "Impeller". There is no particular logic for this suggestion, just throwing it out to the wind :)


    Novel Solutions - http://www.novelsolutionsonline.com/ - Machinery Design • - • Product Development
    "Necessity is the mother of invention." - Author unknown.

  • Didn't we go though all these twists on the Propeller themed names a decade ago?
  • samuell wrote: »
    kwinn wrote: »
    ...
    Programming in C is already in the works, but why cripple a multi core cpu with an IDE for a single core chip?
    Where did you get that idea? I've used PropellerIDE to program in C a multi-core application. Of course it was harder to do than a single core application, since core 0 is always there and implicit, and you don't need to refer to in most cases. A multi-core enabled program requires you to be more specific, but that doesn't have to do with the language or the implementation. It is simply necessary.

    I meant that C is already available via PropellerIDE and Blockly, and the "crippled" comment was referring to tryit's comment about making it compatible with the Arduino IDE. Perhaps crippled was a poor word choice, but I remember using a C editor/compiler back in the Z80 era that allowed for editing the current source code and viewing the source of all the includes. Something akin to the web links. IIRC it was an early HyperText editor and C compiler.
    In science there is no authority. There is only experiment.
    Life is unpredictable. Eat dessert first.
  • samuellsamuell Posts: 143
    edited October 20 Vote Up0Vote Down
    kwinn wrote: »
    samuell wrote: »
    kwinn wrote: »
    ...
    Programming in C is already in the works, but why cripple a multi core cpu with an IDE for a single core chip?
    Where did you get that idea? I've used PropellerIDE to program in C a multi-core application. Of course it was harder to do than a single core application, since core 0 is always there and implicit, and you don't need to refer to in most cases. A multi-core enabled program requires you to be more specific, but that doesn't have to do with the language or the implementation. It is simply necessary.

    I meant that C is already available via PropellerIDE and Blockly, and the "crippled" comment was referring to tryit's comment about making it compatible with the Arduino IDE. Perhaps crippled was a poor word choice, but I remember using a C editor/compiler back in the Z80 era that allowed for editing the current source code and viewing the source of all the includes. Something akin to the web links. IIRC it was an early HyperText editor and C compiler.
    The Arduino part scares the hell out of me. The Arduino C is indeed crippled. No need to make Prop C another victim to fit the simple needs of Arduino like applications. I prefer a more complete, but versatile and structured language that fits any needs, even if that implies more learning. No need to facilitate.
  • Brian FairchildBrian Fairchild Posts: 438
    edited October 20 Vote Up0Vote Down
    samuell wrote: »
    The Arduino C is indeed crippled.

    In what way is it crippled? Under the hood the Arduino IDE uses GCC as its compiler and last time I looked GCC was a standard C compiler.
  • Arduino C is not "crippled".

    For a starter Arduino's are programmed in C++ not plain C.

    The Arduino C/C++ compiler is the same GCC compiler we use in Linux, for the Propeller and many other architectures.

    Admittedly the Arduino has it's own style of support libraries. Dictated by the need to work in a very small memory space.

    But then so does the Propeller. Many other MCU's come with a such a hardware abstraction layer provided by the vendor.


  • samuellsamuell Posts: 143
    edited October 23 Vote Up0Vote Down
    Heater. wrote: »
    Arduino C is not "crippled".

    For a starter Arduino's are programmed in C++ not plain C.

    The Arduino C/C++ compiler is the same GCC compiler we use in Linux, for the Propeller and many other architectures.

    Admittedly the Arduino has it's own style of support libraries. Dictated by the need to work in a very small memory space.

    But then so does the Propeller. Many other MCU's come with a such a hardware abstraction layer provided by the vendor.

    Hi Heather,

    GCC is a C compiler, not a C++ one, so there is a contradiction. If you said it used GPP/G++, I wouldn't have suspected. Nevertheless, even if the base language is the same, the libraries and the GUI suck at it. Why calling sketches, and why the PWM function "analogWrite()"is considered analog? Why not just say is a PWM? This rather lying simplicity is not the way to follow. Arduino is a disaster IMHO. And it cripples the will of learning serious structured programming.

    Anyway, neither C++, neither C is crippled, never said that. C is just as powerful, but C++ allows for more abstraction. But if the libraries are insufficient for the implementation, because the functions were over simplified, whats the use of using them? Plus, are you sure the GCC/GPP/G++ is the same? Does it implement the usual standard libraries? Or are some libs missing? Can I use GNU specific libs?

    Here is an interesting point of view: http://www.hackvandedam.nl/blog/?p=762 (not hard to find rants against the Arduino on the web - I wonder)

    Kind regards, Samuel Lourenço
  • samuell wrote: »
    GCC is a C compiler, not a C++ one, so there is a contradiction. If you said it used GPP/G++, I wouldn't have suspected.

    "GCC" can refer to the whole Gnu Compiler Collection (C, C++, Go, Fortran, Java, and many others), not just the Gnu C Compiler that's found at /usr/bin/gcc.
  • samuell,

    I am "Heater" not "Heather".

    "GCC" is the "GNU Compiler Collection". Which includes C, C++ and a bunch of other languages.

    Now, we can debate the Arduino libraries and such.

    Of course the Arduino setup does not support the normal standard C libraries. Never mind the C++ STL. There is no way they would fit in the memory space available on the Arduino's 8 bit AVR micro-controller.

    It has been common for decades for users of such micro-controllers and other small systems to use the C or C++ language but not use the C/C++ standard libraries. Because they just don't fit. And, well, who needs them?

    By the way, what is "serious structured programming"?

    Sounds like something we were expected to do in the 1970's. Before "Object Oriented Programming", or "Functional Programming", or whatever is the flavor of the week today.

    All in all, I would say the Arduino environment has done a lot to enable people to do things with their little 8 bit micro-controllers. People who have better things to do than get to grips with all the craziness of the C or C++ libraries.


  • To be true you are "Heater." not "Heater", just saying...

    Mike
    I am just another Code Monkey.

    A determined coder can write COBOL programs in any language. -- Author unknown.

    The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this post are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.
  • Yeah, OK.

    That difference between "heater" and "Heater." is an accident of the forum upgrade some years ago. That would not let my former self in.

    Anyway I am Heater. Here to warm your tubes. Spread light into the world. Burn down every thought you held as sacred and possibly ignite some new ideas in your mind.

    Or not. Stop me there. I'm getting above myself again.





  • ..... just wasted energy ;)
    My Prop boards: P8XBlade2, RamBlade, CpuBlade, TriBlade
    Prop OS (also see Sphinx, PropDos, PropCmd, Spinix)
    Website: www.clusos.com
    Prop Tools (Index) , Emulators (Index) , ZiCog (Z80)
  • Yep.
  • Cluso99 wrote: »
    ..... just wasted energy ;)

    But kind of interesting dialogue for some of us lurkers to read sometimes... :D
  • DrPop wrote: »
    Cluso99 wrote: »
    ..... just wasted energy ;)

    But kind of interesting dialogue for some of us lurkers to read sometimes... :D

    I was meaning "heater" to vacuum tubes. The wasted energy is the visual and heat energy wasted in order to just heat the cathode to give off electrons.
    My Prop boards: P8XBlade2, RamBlade, CpuBlade, TriBlade
    Prop OS (also see Sphinx, PropDos, PropCmd, Spinix)
    Website: www.clusos.com
    Prop Tools (Index) , Emulators (Index) , ZiCog (Z80)
  • would have also been a nice name for P2-HOT.

    Mike
    I am just another Code Monkey.

    A determined coder can write COBOL programs in any language. -- Author unknown.

    The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this post are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.
  • Talking about taco chips if we rearrange the letters in TACO it also gives us OCTA. I think I'd like an OCTACHIP anytime soon.
    Tachyon Forth - compact, fast, forthwright and interactive
    useforthlogo-s.png
    Tachyon Forth News Blog
    TACHYON DEMONSTRATOR
    Brisbane, Australia
  • Now you're talking Peter.

    Perhaps you could sell kits with both a taco and a P2. One for your teeth to get stuck into, one for your brain to get stuck into
  • @Peter,

    nice one. I really like it. OCTA. Hihi.

    Mike
    I am just another Code Monkey.

    A determined coder can write COBOL programs in any language. -- Author unknown.

    The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this post are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.
  • OctoJet OctoPack JetPack OctoCore
  • I think we should call it spanky.
    Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball! @opengeekorg ---> Be Excellent To One Another SKYPE = acuity_doug
    Parallax colors simplified: http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php?123709-Commented-Graphics_Demo.spin<br>
  • DrPopDrPop Posts: 145
    edited October 25 Vote Up0Vote Down
    Is this a "fun" thread, or a genuine question from Parallax? Is "Propeller 2" not already set in stone?
  • I think a good name for the P2 would be the 'TurboChip8' :-)

    HydraHacker
Sign In or Register to comment.