TACHYON OBEX / code exchange

MJB

Since the main TACHYON thread is over 440 posts long and mainly about Peters core.
I thought it might be a good idea to have a separate thread to collect Tachyon code contributions.
Like TACHYON OBEX / code exchange.


I am starting to use Tachyon on a PropBoE and wonder if
anybody attempted to use the peripherals there already.


- I2C ADC AD7993 ??
- Sigma-Delta ADC for microphone - MJB
(I have a single shot measurement running - attached - more to come)
- SD-Card - already by Peter SDCARD.fth
- Servo-Ports - by Brian Riley jmservo8.fth
- Sound - in Peters EXTEND.fth counter examples
- VGA - Peter ?? haven't tried yet
- xBee - don't have one yet

I like this TACHYON :cool::thumb:

ATTENTION !!! - does not work for Tachyon 2.1 any more - address of _RUNMOD has changed - need to recompile my code

prof_braino

This is an option, but somebody would have to petition parallax to add forth or Tachyon to the choices for "type" or "attributes" of the uploads section, and this might introduce problems. For one thing, no version of forth is supported or endorsed by parallax, and there is no criterion for consistency that can be applied. Also, the OBEX has its own issues, like search-ability, and consistency of use, etc.

An alternative might be:.

Tachyon (like propforth) could include in the download all the code modules that have been tested and proven compatible with the release.

Propforth has a $***load, and these take significant time to test manually, which is why we set up the scripted automation for build and test. This took two years to come about. I don't know what burdens can be placed on Peter's time, the community might chip in with this work if it is desired.

MJB

@Prof_Braino
actually I was thinking much more informal.
Of just using this thread to post code contributions, so we don't have to read/search all 440 (&growing) posts in the main TACHYON thread.

And I agree to your concerns about consistency especially since Tachyon is still developing.

Maybe a good idea would be to add example code to the code modules, that serve as a functional test, so problems with compatibility to new versions of the core Tachyon could easily detected.

@Prof_Braino btw: is the PropForth source also available like Tachyon ??
In learning Forth internals I like studying Peters kernel & system code very much.
But didn't take the time to look into PropForth.

Peter Jakacki

I like the idea of using the Google docs so that diagrams and images etc can be mixed in with the code. Then there is no need to have to look up various documents. The Google doc is also published as a webpage which will be the document actually accessed for downloading. So there would be a central page linking into sub-pages etc or possibly enhanced with a standard webpage as the homepage.

Tachyon Forth was written not only to run fast etc but to be easily read and compiled as one single file, which is has and is.

prof_braino

MJB wrote: »

@Prof_Braino
actually I was thinking much more informal.
Of just using this thread to post code contributions, so we don't have to read/search all 440 (&growing) posts in the main TACHYON thread.

And I agree to your concerns about consistency especially since Tachyon is still developing.

Maybe a good idea would be to add example code to the code modules, that serve as a functional test, so problems with compatibility to new versions of the core Tachyon could easily detected.

@Prof_Braino btw: is the PropForth source also available like Tachyon ??
In learning Forth internals I like studying Peters kernel & system code very much.
But didn't take the time to look into PropForth.

there is some sparce and sketchy matterial for propforth. google for propforth and the google code site should come up. it includes detailed instructions for setting up the hardware and running the automated build and automated test. the tutorials are detailed examples of the correct operation of every function.

the actual explanation is in the propforth.htm doc included in the download, and ind the wiki pages. we only we documentation based on specific questions, due to time constraints. but we answer all questions if possible.