Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
I wonder why — Parallax Forums

I wonder why

richaj45richaj45 Posts: 179
edited 2013-10-04 22:48 in Propeller 1
Hello:

I am curious why Parallax has not released a Basic Stamp version that uses the Prop. Compared to the other Stamps it sells it would be have great performance.

Any body know the answer?

cheers,
rich

Comments

  • bomberbomber Posts: 297
    edited 2013-10-04 07:44
    Rich, Parallax has done something similar in the past; they discontinued it, sadly. It was pin compatible with the Basic Stamps, but there were several aspects that made it impractical or difficult to use. Since most of the Basic Stamps have 16 I/O lines and the Propeller has 32, 16 of those pins would go to waste. Also, the programming circuitry of the prop an the Basic Stamps is very different. There was a small header that you connected a prop plug to. If you are looking for a small, breadboard friendly propeller module, consider the prop mini (http://www.parallax.com/product/32150) or the PropStick (http://www.parallax.com/product/32210). I hope this helps!
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2013-10-04 07:57
    The main reason is that the Propeller's I/O pins are not 5V compatible. A Propeller would require some kind of level converter to operate with 5V sensors and other such devices and those are not good enough yet to use reliably. Witness the problems in getting a PING to work via the level converters in the hacker port of the S2 or problems with some servos and the Propeller Servo Controller. The SpinStamp fit just barely into a 24-pin module form factor. Adding level converters as well wouldn't work.

    It would have been nice if that could have been done, but Parallax has to approach the larger evolutionary process by developing a BOE replacement like the Activity Board and Propeller BOE, then a BoeBot with the ActivityBot, making a cheaper development board available with the Propeller Project Board, etc. The Propeller Mini uses roughly the same form-factor as the Stamp modules, but is strictly a Propeller board.
  • Duane DegnDuane Degn Posts: 10,588
    edited 2013-10-04 08:01
    While you can't run PBASIC on a Prop there are a couple Basic options. Bean wrote PropBasic which generates PASM code and Mike Green has a couple different Basic language programs which use Spin to run commands entered in Basic. Both are great tools to learn to use the Propeller. With Bean's Basic you can see what assembly instructions are generated and with Mike Green's you can look at his source code to see the Spin commands are used to perform the desired actions.

    I think the main trick to learning to use the Propeller is learning to use multiple cogs in parallel. I find it really helps if I only have one cog use an I/O pin. Don't try to change I/O pin states from two different cogs. If one cog sets a pin high, the other cog can't set it low.

    IMO, the Propeller is well worth learning to use. I have a list in post #3 of my index (see signature) of some Propeller tutorials. I don't think I have any Basic language links, so let us know if you need help finding these.
  • JonnyMacJonnyMac Posts: 9,107
    edited 2013-10-04 08:19
    I think the main trick to learning to use the Propeller is learning to use multiple cogs in parallel.

    Yep, and IMHO, Spin makes multi-cog programming the easiest. This should come as no surprise as Chip Gracey designed Spin to be easy, and to make multi-cog applications easy. There are a lot of other languages that one can use (and most of use experiment with, if not put to serious use), but I think starting with Spin gives the programmer solid Propeller fundamentals that make taking advantage (or working around features) of other languages easier.

    And, to date, Spin is the only language for the Propeller that has any appreciable documentation. That will change with with the GCC project, but for the moment, you can get more assistance with Spin than any other Propeller language.
  • WBA ConsultingWBA Consulting Posts: 2,934
    edited 2013-10-04 13:51
    I would have to say that interest in that type of solution as well as how it would fit into their grand scheme of educational product lines would put this concept on hold. I base that on the fact that I have exactly what you are asking about. A colleague and I developed the Propeller BSC Module (BASIC Stamp Compatible). Unfortunately, due to low interest, we have not been past the 2 fully functional prototypes. Check out this thread and this website for specifics. The thought was this would be a clear avenue to get BOE-Bot owners into multicore programming and now, even C programming, at a very low cost since they would already have the BOE-Bot platform. Our module drops right into any BS2 socket, is 5 volt compatible, and also provides several features not currently available on any other Propeller based product.
  • richaj45richaj45 Posts: 179
    edited 2013-10-04 22:48
    Hello:

    What i was thinking is not a form fit module but an option on the Basic Stamp compiler such that you could just target a Prop and then there would be more options in the language but the Basic command would be the same to the use. That way there would have been no learning curve to use the prop to get more throughput and more memory space.

    With all the third party tools that have popped up, i just don't think Parallax has the manpower or know how to build multi-platform optimizing compiler technology.

    After all why should there be a different tool interface to the user for any of there compiler products. It just needs to be expandable as new target devices or languages come on line.

    Just thinking out loud. No offense intended.

    cheers,
    rich
Sign In or Register to comment.