I think that of all the microcontrollers out there, the Prop is the best for the money. What other chip can just handle video and keyboards without any external drivers?
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔ Just call me micro.
If it's not Parallax then don't even bother. · I have changed my avatar so that I will no longer be confused with others who use genaric avatars.
Mini-Din/PS2 connectors are for sale! 5 for $1! PM me if you wish to make an order. Cheap·shipping unless specified!··········150 left!!··
When comparing to other microprocessors, there are things I like about the propeller, but most of all it is the support(and entertainment) of this forum.
Some things I like about others:
The SeaForth processors have Up, Down, Left, Right registers that link their processors together. When you try to read one that hasn't been written yet, the processor stalls(sleeps) until it is provided by the writers side.
This is done in hardware, and will stop an instruction unlike WaitPNE which has to be added to your code. This type of logic could be put in the cogs registers. It would take 4 more of those precious longs, but think of the possibilities!
Another thing I like about others is more IO pins. A year ago, when it was decided to not pursue the P8x32B, for dedicating resources to the prop2, I was disapointed, and still am. The extra IO's would have helped greatly with external memory and such, and because the prop1 is a lower power processor, it will still be used for many applications in the future. Of course, when Prop2 comes out, I reserve my right to change my mind;^) but I think that is too big of a step. The 64io prop would have filled in nicely(and depending on how long it will take for the prop2, it still can)
As for other processors. Notice I am wanting features added to my prop. I don't plan on going anywhere other than to look around. I like the simplicity. I like having no interrupts! I like all of the amazing stuff you guys develop and give away here on the forum. I have listened to the same 5 songs I have in midi about 6 times today because it is so amazing what sounds can come out just 2(left and right) pins! Thanks Ariba!
hinv: You are so right.
About the forum, about the CPU-CPU communication, about the I/O pins, the lack of interrupts, the simplicity....
The Prop is a strange beast:
Too big to compete with the weeny PICs and AVRs at jobs where they fit.
Too small to compete with the Linux running ARMS and such.
Has the awesome power of 32 bit CPUs (8 of them for god sake) but the terrible confinement of 496 instructions each.
Has the most simple, regular, instruction set/ASM syntax of any processor I've used seriously but is totally not suited to running compiled high level languages.
Maybe Parallax should be called "Paradox".
An aside: I recently had to knock up a device driver for Linux to wiggle some simple I/O pins. The equivalent of "DIRA something" and "OUTA/INA something" for the program that uses it. Very simple in terms of Linux device drivers but still a couple of hundred lines long and a fair bit of Linux device driver research required.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
For me, the past is not over yet.
This thread is always a good read particularly the comments about debuggers.
Sort of like Real Programmers do not use debuggers etc.
That's like saying I have never used a spell checker as only real writers can use a word processor without a typo or a PCB design rule checker for example.
Anyone here remember Bishop Graphics artwork materials for PCB layout?
Although a debugger is a bit overboard for "Hello World" but sometimes complex tasks require complex tools.
Cheers
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Caelum videre iussit, et erectos ad sidera tollere vultus
I don't really have a downer on debuggers. But what is a debugger? That oscilloscope I watch the outputs with, the logic analyzer hooked on the bus between CPUs. I've used a telephone ear piece to listen to bugs when no other equipment was available.
I've often heard that some like to single step their way through code to "see that it works" prior to running for real in the live system. That's fine but if you are going to do that why not wrap the module in a test harness that checks a lot more possibilities than you ever will single stepping manulally, can be repeated easily when you modify your code, and takes about as much time and effort as the sigle step in debugger exercise.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
For me, the past is not over yet.
just a comment: heater, you are right. An ear is such a perfect instrument. I did the same! And the prop gives you a bitmap on a screen and you see the bits changing in real time. Again just versatility.
Praxis said...
This thread is always a good read particularly the comments about debuggers.
Sort of like Real Programmers do not use debuggers etc.
That's like saying I have never used a spell checker as only real writers can use a word processor without a typo or a PCB design rule checker for example.
Anyone here remember Bishop Graphics artwork materials for PCB layout?
Although a debugger is a bit overboard for "Hello World" but sometimes complex tasks require complex tools.
Cheers
Comparing a debugger to a spellchecker is the wrong analogy. A spellchecker is more akin to the compiler
catching your syntaxerrors. Consider this sentence: ············· These ease a cent en that ill a straits y a spellchecker dos nut work all these time. ············· (this is a sentence that illustrate why a spellchecker ·does not work all the time)
The above will pass a spell checker, but is very obviously in semantic error. Consider this one ················ I want to ensure my car
Can you see the error here? a spell checker did not catch this one either. But its semantic error
is not very obvious. Can you see the problem?? Look again….can you see it now? No….then you
need an English language debugger. If you saw it already then you do not need an English language
debugger.
Here is another one of my favorite subtle English semantic errors ···················· This has a bad affect on the environment.
Neither a spellchecker nor a grammar checker caught this one.
Sam
When I was first learning to program, on a 2 MHz 8080A with no dev tools other than a hex editor, I used to use an AM radio to listen to the machine's RF pollution. I could easily tell when something crashed the interrupt system because its distinct 60 Hz hash would cease, and other common operations (like scrolling the screen) had easily recognizable signatures.
microcontrolled said...
I think that of all the microcontrollers out there, the Prop is the best for the money. What other chip can just handle video and keyboards without any external drivers?
Imo 'Best' relates to what you need to do.· It seems the Prop's video capabilties are fequently tossed around in this context, and I'll agree it's a very cool feature, but not every project requires a video display.· As for keyboards, virtually all the common chips can accomodate ps2 interfaces.
heater said...
The Prop is a strange beast:
Too big to compete with the weeny PICs and AVRs at jobs where they fit.
Too small to compete with the Linux running ARMS and such.
Has the awesome power of 32 bit CPUs (8 of them for god sake) but the terrible confinement of 496 instructions each.
Has the most simple, regular, instruction set/ASM syntax of any processor I've used seriously but is totally not suited to running compiled high level languages.
This is where I'm trying determine how the Prop fits in, I think you've encapsulated it very well here.
Do you remember those cards that had an DAC on the lower 8-Bit addresses and one on the upper 8 bit addresses, each channel going to X or Y of an scope and the address-latch to the Z-input?
Nick
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Never use force, just go for a bigger hammer!
The DIY Digital-Readout for mills, lathes etc.: YADRO
heater said...
The Prop is a strange beast: . . . Maybe Parallax should be called "Paradox".
Too right.· On one hand the Propeller has some serious I/O power - eight 32 bit processors and 32 flexible I/O pins.· On the other hand, those 32 bit processors only have 486 longs of local RAM and 32K of shared RAM and no built-in external memory bus.· For stuff which fits into those limitations, the Propeller has definite advantage.· But if you have dreams of porting Linux or anything which needs more than 32K of RAM, you're in for a nasty surprise.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Composite NTSC sprite driver: Forum
NTSC & PAL driver templates: ObExForum
OnePinTVText driver: ObExForum
parts-man73 said...
It confuses me why users of other microcontrollers have such disdain for the Propeller. I mentioned it on another microcontroller forum (which by the way, is not for any specific micro, so it wasn't like I was posting on another company's turf) and I received responses that made it obvious that they didn't want to hear about the Propeller.
I really think that if they got over themselves and tried it, they'd love it. (if they went into it with an open mind)
I do believe there is the right tool for the right job. Just as you wouldn't try to drive a nail with a screwdriver, you don't need a Propeller to drive a HD44780 LCD. I simple $3 PIC will suffice. But the speed in which you can develop a project always impresses me (that coupled with the fact the I have an abundance of Propeller circuit boards around ) that I use a propeller in most every project nowadays.
I am an Atmel user and I really like their controllers.
That said, though, I also truly like the propeller. I am fairly new to the propeller (although I have been working with computers for nearly 35 years, and according to my mother, been working with electronics since she gave me a battery, wires and a light bulb at age 2) I think that there is a lot of potential with that system (hard to call it just a microcontroller with eight computers on one chip) and I think Parallax really outdid themselves. I originally became acquainted with Parallax through Scott Edwards' Counterfeit Stamp article in Nuts & Volts. I built one of those and really enjoyed the simplicity and versatility of that little circuit. Since then, I played around a bit with Microchip's PIC series, but really got down and dirty with Atmel's AVR line. I wrote the instruction manual for the Chibot (Chicago Area Robotics Group) Table Top Bot from Wright Hobby Robotics which uses an AVR Mega-48 for it's brain, and am in the process of writing an Introduction to Microcontrollers book with a kit for the Tiny 13, an Introduction to Robotics with a $15-$25 bot based on the Tiny 2313 and a more in-depth college-level Microcontroller Course book with a full-featured development kit, based on the Mega 8 and the Tiny 13 (master-slave topics will be introduced, along with other topics). Most of my material is aimed at the student scientist or student engineer (or younger students who have an inclination towards engineering/science). In other words, I also have a large number of microcontrollers around (mostly Atmel, but several TI's, a Renasas, a couple of PICs, several MC6800s, a couple of RCA 1802s and several Z-80s). I can put together a simple project in a very short time with the chips and boards that I have on hand.
Even though I have been involved with computers since 1975 and controllers, specifically since 1994, I did not really notice the propeller other than to think that it looked kinda cool ("...but, I'm really busy with my day job - network engineer for a major insurance company - and my Atmel stuff"). It was the announcement about the UNPENE in Ohio next weekend that got my attention. I really love going to electronics expos, but can't afford to get to the West Coast for theirs. This one was going to be close enough that I thought that I may be able to make it. Well, if I was to be going to an expo on the Propeller, I really thought that I should get to know the "wee beastie" (as my favorite 23rd century engineer puts it). I have ordered and received the parts to put together a simple development system (almost done wiring it up - this Saturday should do it). I plan on having a simple demo for the expo, showing how simple and cheap it can be to get into the field with the Propeller. Already, ideas are starting to form in my head about books and kits that I can write/put together featuring the Propeller. I really do like the Propeller, but this system is not really a microcontroller - kinda like comparing a small office network, with server, workstations, network printers and internet gateway/router to a lone computer.
All of this long-winded essay is just to say that not all "users of other microcontrollers have such disdain for the Propeller." There are a lot of us out there who do not need to have "got over themselves and tried it". Those of us who are in this as a real hobby or a profession are going to be open-minded enough to try it, we just need something to tip the scales and break into our busy schedules (thanks a MILLION for the effort that you have put into this Expo, OBC!)
Art G. Granzeier III, President
Granzeier Consulting
Comments
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Just call me micro.
If it's not Parallax then don't even bother.
·
I have changed my avatar so that I will no longer be confused with others who use genaric avatars.
Mini-Din/PS2 connectors are for sale! 5 for $1! PM me if you wish to make an order.
Cheap·shipping unless specified!··········150 left!!··
Some things I like about others:
The SeaForth processors have Up, Down, Left, Right registers that link their processors together. When you try to read one that hasn't been written yet, the processor stalls(sleeps) until it is provided by the writers side.
This is done in hardware, and will stop an instruction unlike WaitPNE which has to be added to your code. This type of logic could be put in the cogs registers. It would take 4 more of those precious longs, but think of the possibilities!
Another thing I like about others is more IO pins. A year ago, when it was decided to not pursue the P8x32B, for dedicating resources to the prop2, I was disapointed, and still am. The extra IO's would have helped greatly with external memory and such, and because the prop1 is a lower power processor, it will still be used for many applications in the future. Of course, when Prop2 comes out, I reserve my right to change my mind;^) but I think that is too big of a step. The 64io prop would have filled in nicely(and depending on how long it will take for the prop2, it still can)
As for other processors. Notice I am wanting features added to my prop. I don't plan on going anywhere other than to look around. I like the simplicity. I like having no interrupts! I like all of the amazing stuff you guys develop and give away here on the forum. I have listened to the same 5 songs I have in midi about 6 times today because it is so amazing what sounds can come out just 2(left and right) pins! Thanks Ariba!
Just my 10 bits worth,
Doug
About the forum, about the CPU-CPU communication, about the I/O pins, the lack of interrupts, the simplicity....
The Prop is a strange beast:
Too big to compete with the weeny PICs and AVRs at jobs where they fit.
Too small to compete with the Linux running ARMS and such.
Has the awesome power of 32 bit CPUs (8 of them for god sake) but the terrible confinement of 496 instructions each.
Has the most simple, regular, instruction set/ASM syntax of any processor I've used seriously but is totally not suited to running compiled high level languages.
Maybe Parallax should be called "Paradox".
An aside: I recently had to knock up a device driver for Linux to wiggle some simple I/O pins. The equivalent of "DIRA something" and "OUTA/INA something" for the program that uses it. Very simple in terms of Linux device drivers but still a couple of hundred lines long and a fair bit of Linux device driver research required.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
For me, the past is not over yet.
Sort of like Real Programmers do not use debuggers etc.
That's like saying I have never used a spell checker as only real writers can use a word processor without a typo or a PCB design rule checker for example.
Anyone here remember Bishop Graphics artwork materials for PCB layout?
Although a debugger is a bit overboard for "Hello World" but sometimes complex tasks require complex tools.
Cheers
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Caelum videre iussit, et erectos ad sidera tollere vultus
Certe, toto, sentio nos in kansate non iam adesse
I don't really have a downer on debuggers. But what is a debugger? That oscilloscope I watch the outputs with, the logic analyzer hooked on the bus between CPUs. I've used a telephone ear piece to listen to bugs when no other equipment was available.
I've often heard that some like to single step their way through code to "see that it works" prior to running for real in the live system. That's fine but if you are going to do that why not wrap the module in a test harness that checks a lot more possibilities than you ever will single stepping manulally, can be repeated easily when you modify your code, and takes about as much time and effort as the sigle step in debugger exercise.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
For me, the past is not over yet.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
cmapspublic3.ihmc.us:80/servlet/SBReadResourceServlet?rid=1181572927203_421963583_5511&partName=htmltext
Hello Rest Of The World
Hello Debris
Install a propeller and blow them away
catching your syntax errors. Consider this sentence:
············· These ease a cent en that ill a straits y a spellchecker dos nut work all these time.
············· (this is a sentence that illustrate why a spellchecker ·does not work all the time)
The above will pass a spell checker, but is very obviously in semantic error. Consider this one
················ I want to ensure my car
Can you see the error here? a spell checker did not catch this one either. But its semantic error
is not very obvious. Can you see the problem?? Look again….can you see it now? No….then you
need an English language debugger. If you saw it already then you do not need an English language
debugger.
Here is another one of my favorite subtle English semantic errors
···················· This has a bad affect on the environment.
Neither a spellchecker nor a grammar checker caught this one.
Sam
This is where I'm trying determine how the Prop fits in, I think you've encapsulated it very well here.
·
Nick
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Never use force, just go for a bigger hammer!
The DIY Digital-Readout for mills, lathes etc.:
YADRO
Perhaps but think of it more as a metaphor in that case.
Cheers
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Caelum videre iussit, et erectos ad sidera tollere vultus
Certe, toto, sentio nos in kansate non iam adesse
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Composite NTSC sprite driver: Forum
NTSC & PAL driver templates: ObEx Forum
OnePinTVText driver: ObEx Forum
I am an Atmel user and I really like their controllers.
That said, though, I also truly like the propeller. I am fairly new to the propeller (although I have been working with computers for nearly 35 years, and according to my mother, been working with electronics since she gave me a battery, wires and a light bulb at age 2) I think that there is a lot of potential with that system (hard to call it just a microcontroller with eight computers on one chip) and I think Parallax really outdid themselves. I originally became acquainted with Parallax through Scott Edwards' Counterfeit Stamp article in Nuts & Volts. I built one of those and really enjoyed the simplicity and versatility of that little circuit. Since then, I played around a bit with Microchip's PIC series, but really got down and dirty with Atmel's AVR line. I wrote the instruction manual for the Chibot (Chicago Area Robotics Group) Table Top Bot from Wright Hobby Robotics which uses an AVR Mega-48 for it's brain, and am in the process of writing an Introduction to Microcontrollers book with a kit for the Tiny 13, an Introduction to Robotics with a $15-$25 bot based on the Tiny 2313 and a more in-depth college-level Microcontroller Course book with a full-featured development kit, based on the Mega 8 and the Tiny 13 (master-slave topics will be introduced, along with other topics). Most of my material is aimed at the student scientist or student engineer (or younger students who have an inclination towards engineering/science). In other words, I also have a large number of microcontrollers around (mostly Atmel, but several TI's, a Renasas, a couple of PICs, several MC6800s, a couple of RCA 1802s and several Z-80s). I can put together a simple project in a very short time with the chips and boards that I have on hand.
Even though I have been involved with computers since 1975 and controllers, specifically since 1994, I did not really notice the propeller other than to think that it looked kinda cool ("...but, I'm really busy with my day job - network engineer for a major insurance company - and my Atmel stuff"). It was the announcement about the UNPENE in Ohio next weekend that got my attention. I really love going to electronics expos, but can't afford to get to the West Coast for theirs. This one was going to be close enough that I thought that I may be able to make it. Well, if I was to be going to an expo on the Propeller, I really thought that I should get to know the "wee beastie" (as my favorite 23rd century engineer puts it). I have ordered and received the parts to put together a simple development system (almost done wiring it up - this Saturday should do it). I plan on having a simple demo for the expo, showing how simple and cheap it can be to get into the field with the Propeller. Already, ideas are starting to form in my head about books and kits that I can write/put together featuring the Propeller. I really do like the Propeller, but this system is not really a microcontroller - kinda like comparing a small office network, with server, workstations, network printers and internet gateway/router to a lone computer.
All of this long-winded essay is just to say that not all "users of other microcontrollers have such disdain for the Propeller." There are a lot of us out there who do not need to have "got over themselves and tried it". Those of us who are in this as a real hobby or a profession are going to be open-minded enough to try it, we just need something to tip the scales and break into our busy schedules (thanks a MILLION for the effort that you have put into this Expo, OBC!)
Art G. Granzeier III, President
Granzeier Consulting