I want a P2! And how are we going to get these to you?

13468918

Comments

  • I thought you would do an emulation of the Ym2413a! ;)
    SIDcog - The sound of the Commodore 64 in a single cog: Thread, OBEX
  • Ahle2 wrote: »
    I thought you would do an emulation of the Ym2413a! ;)
    One of my favourites. : ]

    I'm aiming more WaveTable Synthesis with audio sample compression and built in channel effects for the Prop2.
    The fact that cogs now have a multiply operation will help a lot with realtime audio processing. : ]
  • JRetSapDoogJRetSapDoog Posts: 832
    edited 2018-11-01 - 10:16:46
    Man, I hope you're joking... I can speak of myself, but be sure "the nerve of asking for two" was done in the perspective of getting 1500 chips packaged and put on boards.
    Yep, I knew about the 1500 and was totally joking, which I tried to make clear by my over-the-top fake disgust and "ha-ha." I just tacked that comment on to the end in an effort to bring a smile to someone's day with a reference to a Seinfeld TV episode. Apologies for not being more clear that I was kidding. Out of an abundance of caution (as opposed to any feeling of guilt for trying to inject some humor) I have edited my post and struck through the potentially offensive text (or text that could be taken the wrong way). And even if we only were to get one tenth of that 1500 boards, there are people here that could put two or more of them to good use in terms of development and testing. A chip could easily be lost in testing to extreme, for example.
  • I don't think any offence was taken.
    My Prop boards: P8XBlade2 , RamBlade , CpuBlade , TriBlade
    P1 Prop OS (also see Sphinx, PropDos, PropCmd, Spinix)
    Website: www.clusos.com
    P1: Tools (Index) , Emulators (Index) , ZiCog (Z80)
    P2: Tools & Code , Tricks & Traps
  • I don't need to be on for 2.. Just to make sure everyone gets a chance. I have some ideas, but in view of the limited time I have to work on this, perhaps I should be at the bottom of the list as well
  • David BetzDavid Betz Posts: 13,592
    edited 2018-11-01 - 12:46:20
    R Baggett wrote: »
    I have some ideas, but in view of the limited time I have to work on this, perhaps I should be at the bottom of the list as well
    I guess I should say the same thing unless Parallax wants to prioritize PropGCC work. My own ideas probably aren't that important for verifying the chip. Actually, there is really no reason I can't just use my Prop123-A9 board.

  • I cannot justify having two boards as there are much more productive testers that just only asked for one, and resources are limited. So please, just count on me for one board. And put me on the bottom of the list.
  • TorTor Posts: 1,983
    Put me at the very bottom of the list please. There are others that can start doing useful things much earlier than I can.
  • Tor wrote: »
    Put me at the very bottom of the list please. There are others that can start doing useful things much earlier than I can.
    Seems like it's a race to the bottom! :smile:

  • Indeed.

    Just one needed for me.

    Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball! @opengeekorg ---> Be Excellent To One Another SKYPE = acuity_doug
  • potatohead wrote: »
    Indeed.
    Just one needed for me.
    Same for me.
    garryj
  • Anyone on the P2 early interest list live in the Los Angeles area?
    Might be good to collaborate / share early boards when people are geographically close.
  • I don't need any, I want dozens! :D

    I think I might "need" one at some point for helping with tools dev, but I could probably get by with the Prop123-A9 board.
  • David Betz wrote: »
    ... unless Parallax wants to prioritize PropGCC work.

    From what I've seen throughout the last couple years, Parallax will prioritize PropGCC from the get go of P2 tooling development. And from what Ken said a few weeks ago, that should be coming any day. Last we heard from him on the matter was that he'd be scheduling a meeting for PropGCC devs at the beginning of November. We're getting close!
    David
    PropWare: C++ HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer) for PropGCC; Robust build system using CMake; Integrated Simple Library, libpropeller, and libPropelleruino (Arduino port); Instructions for Eclipse and JetBrain's CLion; Example projects; Doxygen documentation
    CI Server: https://ci.zemon.name?guest=1
  • Tor wrote: »
    Put me at the very bottom of the list please. There are others that can start doing useful things much earlier than I can.

    Me too, please.

    Tulsa, OK

    My OBEX objects:
    AGEL: Another Google Earth Logger
    DHT11 Sensor

    I didn't do it... and I promise not to do it again!
  • I would rather the 2 boards I asked for go to others who can use them.
  • jmgjmg Posts: 14,152
    David Betz wrote: »
    I guess I should say the same thing unless Parallax wants to prioritize PropGCC work. My own ideas probably aren't that important for verifying the chip. Actually, there is really no reason I can't just use my Prop123-A9 board.
    Yes and no.
    If I were Parallax, I'd ensure anyone writing P2 Tool-flow software did get a real P2, because as is often seen on here, the end to end deployment of software has many issues around download/reset and just general handshake delays.
    It also gets many more experienced eyes, all watching P2's startup and loading areas, catching those 'That's strange..' moments.

    That type of cold-start-and-go testing is not so easy to manage on a FPGA system.


  • DavidZemon wrote: »
    David Betz wrote: »
    ... unless Parallax wants to prioritize PropGCC work.

    From what I've seen throughout the last couple years, Parallax will prioritize PropGCC from the get go of P2 tooling development. And from what Ken said a few weeks ago, that should be coming any day. Last we heard from him on the matter was that he'd be scheduling a meeting for PropGCC devs at the beginning of November. We're getting close!
    I think there is some question about the best way to move forward. There is PropGCC but others have suggested LLVM and there are a number of projects including Dave Hein's that involved building a compiler from scratch. I think Parallax first needs to decide which approach to take before we line up volunteers to work on this. That is likely going to be the topic of the meeting.

  • Tor wrote: »
    Put me at the very bottom of the list please. There are others that can start doing useful things much earlier than I can.

    Same here. As much as I want a parallax-p2-eval-board and a P2 chip for a project I am starting I don't really need them as it is very unlikely it would make a contribution to testing the chip.
    In science there is no authority. There is only experiment.
    Life is unpredictable. Eat dessert first.
  • Tor wrote: »
    Put me at the very bottom of the list please. There are others that can start doing useful things much earlier than I can.

    Same here. As much as I want a parallax-p2-eval-board and a P2 chip for a project I am starting I don't really need them as it is very unlikely it would make a contribution to testing the chip.
    In science there is no authority. There is only experiment.
    Life is unpredictable. Eat dessert first.
  • I would like a parallax-p2-eval-board with a P2 chip, I put my name on the list in the other thread titled "Parallax P2 Eval Board"
    forums.parallax.com/discussion/comment/1450985#Comment_1450985
  • pik33pik33 Posts: 792
    edited 2018-11-01 - 20:05:18
    Ym2413a wrote: »
    Ahle2 wrote: »
    I thought you would do an emulation of the Ym2413a! ;)
    One of my favourites. : ]

    I'm aiming more WaveTable Synthesis with audio sample compression and built in channel effects for the Prop2.
    The fact that cogs now have a multiply operation will help a lot with realtime audio processing. : ]

    FM synthesizer maybe? Good universal FM Synth not limited to "algorithms" and sine wave... I started one for PC now (alpha stage code here: https://github.com/pik33/20180824-retro-fm - needs some sample files not in the repository, if someone wants to try this, please PM for details ) , as it is now the thing is very CPU power hungry, but P2 seems to be a good chip for this type of things when properly coded in asm.
  • I was thinking $200 a board. I think that is fair...that's $20,000=1/4 of a tech for a year or so. Or insurance on 5 free students:)

    I agree... if they are going out for free. I only need one(1), but I'm going to ruin it. I always ruin at least one of everything:)

    If there is a reasonable cost... I'd take everything left over:)

    Fabulous progress.

  • MJBMJB Posts: 1,135
    Ym2413a wrote: »
    Because it's late at night and I got nothing better to do now that the kids are asleep, I totalled up all the people up who asked to receive a P2 or P2 board.

    79 People have asked.
    Some asked for multiplies so the total requested P2s comes out to: 97

    I changed my request to a single board, since the limited supply.
    I'm doing DSP/Audio stuff much like I did on the P1. So I only need one board really to test that out.

    People who've asked:
    ...
    MJB
    ...

    I will not be able to sufficiently contribute right now -
    so I'll be waiting for second revision next year.

    gives a second board for a high speed serial test for someone ..
  • I want to do device driver development, so I think I'm an appropriate recipient for _one_ board.

    But I would like to suggest that Parallax needs to decide what the official development platform and language are for the P2. I invested a lot of time and energy into Spin, and then one day ... ? This needs to not happen again. If it's going to be gcc, it needs to be gcc all the way down. Yes, P2 will support alternate boot environments, but Parallax needs to decide what the OBEX is in so that we can target it. I don't care if it's Spin or C++ or Fortran, but I want the other developers to be able to load and work with what I produce. If I'm working in Spin and they're working in C, that doesn't work, and it's one reason new work on P1 drivers has all but halted.

    The big reason Arduino succeeded isn't that it's such a good platform; I work with a guy who is a big Ardweenie and he constantly complains about the limitations of the 8-bit single-core processor, and he winces when I remind him what I can do on the Propeller. But the Arduino succeeded because every single one, even those based on far more different hardware than a Propeller will ever represent, can be developed and downloaded by a common IDE that is the same for everybody. If I develop something cool and put it in the OBEX or whatever takes its place, I want everybody who owns a propeller based product to be able to load, edit, play with, and download it to their board. P1 succeeded in part because for years the PropTool was that IDE. Please make sure we know what that tool will be before the P2 rolls out.
  • Ym2413aYm2413a Posts: 630
    edited 2018-11-02 - 10:49:10
    Updated the list:

    85 People have asked.
    Some asked for multiplies so the total requested P2s comes out to: 98

    People who've asked: (First Round Contribution - Drivers, DevTools, Hardware Testing)
    dMajo
    lostcauz
    whicker
    zappman
    garryj
    Heater.
    78rpm
    Ahle2
    Ale
    Amaral
    Bean x2
    Bob Lawrence (VE1RLL)
    Cluso99
    Coley
    Dave Hein
    DaveJenson x2
    David Betz
    DavidZemon
    Ding-Batty x2
    DiverBob
    Electrodude
    Jim Fouch x2
    John Abshier x2
    Jon_Thomasson
    K2
    LeoD x2
    MByron x2
    Mickster
    Mike Green
    PropGuy2
    Publison
    Rayman x2
    Roy Eltham
    Seairth
    T Chap
    Teva McMillan x2
    TonyB_
    TrapperBob
    Tubular
    Whit
    Ym2413a
    __red__
    avsa242
    banjo
    cheezus x2
    ctwardell
    dgately
    evanh
    fixmax x2
    fpalmans
    frank freedman
    hkiela
    ikemschn
    iseries
    jac_goudsmit
    jmg
    ke4pjw
    marrokev x2
    marsman2020
    msrobots
    octetta
    pedward x2
    pik33
    pmrobert x2
    potatohead
    rjo__ x2
    rosco_pc
    samuell
    thej
    ti85
    tritonium
    tw1
    twm47099
    veluxllc


    People who've asked: (Will Contribute Later, Applications, Products, Etc)
    JRetSapDoog
    AntoineDoinel
    R Baggett
    Ramon
    Tor
    wmosscrop
    Genetix
    kwinn
    MJB
    localroger
    tomcrawford
  • I know what you mean localroger.

    But let's not confuse IDEs, which are basically editors, with languages, libraries, compilers.

    I only looked into the P1 when I found I did not need Windows and the Propeller Tool to use it.

    I'd like to think that Spin is Spin and that Spin code from the P1 will build and run just fine on the P2.

    I have no idea if that is on the table or not.
  • Heater. wrote: »
    I only looked into the P1 when I found I did not need Windows and the Propeller Tool to use it.

    That's awesome.

    I'm a linux user, so I like platform independence
  • Oh boy. That was a long time ago.

    I had dismissed the P1 as being a) Too weird, and b) dependent on a Windows IDE.

    Then I discovered the P1 assembler by Cliff Biffle : https://github.com/cbiffle/propasm

    Jees, that was 12 years ago...

    Then, luckily came Homespun and BST.
  • Heater. wrote: »
    Oh boy. That was a long time ago.
    ....
    Jees, that was 12 years ago...

    I know, time flies.
Sign In or Register to comment.