Questions For The Moderators And Parallax
idbruce
Posts: 6,197
Over the last month, I have jumped into SimpleIDE and GCC, and at this point, most of my contributions will become SimpleIDE, GCC, C++, and C specific. Over the years, I have seen a lot of SimpleIDE, GCC, C++, and C specific topics flow through this branch of the forum, with no admonishment or thread relocation. Since they all pertain to the Propeller, I don't imagine there should be too much fuss, but now I wonder where I should make my posts.
Is Propeller GCC supposed to be GCC specific, or is this supposed to include SimpleIDE posts?
Is this branch now intended to be SPIN specific?
And now consider all the other language varieties.......
Although I am sure that Propeller GCC is quite active in the background, that branch of the forum appears to be a little inactive. Considering the wide variety of language developments within this branch, do we really want to add to the cluster, with C/C++?
I am making this post to obtain guidance, but I also have my two cents......
Instead of promoting another language within this branch, perhaps SimpleIDE, GCC, C++, and C related postings should be restricted to Propeller GCC and perhaps that branch should be renamed Propeller GCC - C/C++ Development.
Is Propeller GCC supposed to be GCC specific, or is this supposed to include SimpleIDE posts?
Is this branch now intended to be SPIN specific?
And now consider all the other language varieties.......
Although I am sure that Propeller GCC is quite active in the background, that branch of the forum appears to be a little inactive. Considering the wide variety of language developments within this branch, do we really want to add to the cluster, with C/C++?
I am making this post to obtain guidance, but I also have my two cents......
Instead of promoting another language within this branch, perhaps SimpleIDE, GCC, C++, and C related postings should be restricted to Propeller GCC and perhaps that branch should be renamed Propeller GCC - C/C++ Development.
Comments
The split with the code based forums has helped my stubbornness with sticking with SPIN only by not having to sort out threads in the Propeller forum that are C based. SPIN is still just too easy for my projects and I have been really hesitant to learn C because my Prop fun time is so limited. While I completely agree with your way of thinking about the merge, it means I will be more exposed to C. So, as I am kicking the dirt, I also suggest that those forums be merged.
Heres the thing.... I like SPIN also, and it has served it's purpose for me, but concerning my lastest endeavors, I have been forced into applying C to the Propeller, and of course, I was also being reluctant, even though I have a fair background in C and C++. However since I have started applying it to the Propeller, there is no turning back now.
One of the biggest advantages of learning C for the Propeller (your case) or simply applying knowledge of C to the Propeller (my case), there is just such a vast amount of resources available. C and C++ is all over the internet, whereas SPIN is pretty much restricted to parallax.com. If you want to do something in SPIN, you either have to write it yourself or hope that someone has created an object and uploaded it to the OBEX. Whereas with C, odds are that you will find something readily available to suit your needs, that may or may not need a little alteration to be a perfect fit, and it may even end up being a lot better than you hoped for. For example, consider one of my latest threads: http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php/160271-SUCCESS-Converting-mbed-C-to-C-to-Propeller-GCC....-BUG-B-GONE. Although the title is a little misleading, the end result is bad to the bone. I needed source code to interface with an ADS1015 12 Bit 4 Channel breakout board. The fact that it is a breakout board is unimportant, but the source code to interface with the ADS1015 is of the utmost importance. The original code was ported quite easily to Prop GCC and it has a lot of functionality for selecting channels, conversion rates, gain, setting threshholds, operating mode, etc.... For me to have written this all in SPIN would have taken forever, and seriously, I doubt I could have done it, but by going with C, it was fully functional in less than 11-1/2 hrs, and a lot of that time, I wasn't even working on the code.
What you do is entirely up to you, but yes Andrew, I am jumping on the band wagon and highly suggesting that you learn C
I peruse the PropGCC forum for more often than the parent because, frankly, I'm useless with Spin. There have been times I could have helped someone much sooner had they posted under PropGCC and caught my attention.
David
I think there is merit in having a split between developing Prop GCC and real world code using Prop GCC
I notice there is an older
Propeller GCC Alpha Test Forum
& the
Propeller GCC, which is called The forum for GCC Development
so perhaps those could morph a little (as alpha test is now past..?) into something like
Propeller GCC & IDE Development Forum
Propeller GCC & IDE Usage Forum
I would have to agree that there is a big difference between usage and development, and nobody likes having there workspace cluttered with someone elses junk
I'm not the person who makes the big decisions Chris was talking about, so I checked with Chris and asked him what to do.
I think you should post your C questions in the Propeller 1 Multicore forum.
And, I think we should collapse the GCC development forum into the Propeller 1 forum. After all, the development is mostly done and that forum is now quite.
I'll get with Bump to see that we can get this done.
Good to see you here.
Thanks,
Ken Gracey
That'll work for me. Just wanted to have direction.
-Phil
Ya begrudgin' me some viddles?
They don't have any mean dogs or guns, so you'll be just fine.
Your job is to show them the joys of Spin. And we don't have any rules against whining, unfortunately, but you might as well get it out of your system.
Oh, for the Spinsters who complain that we love C more than Spin, you should see the investments (and RESULTS) we've made on your behalf for Propeller IDE and the Jon Titus Spin book. Lots of new Spin examples and development tool progress has been made recently.
Ken Gracey
But sometimes even the best ideas have unintended consequences, and now I'm wondering if it can be undone. Here's the problem: before, whenever I brought up a list of new posts, looking for titles that interested me or that I might be able to help with, I was able to pass by the ones in the GCC sub-forum, since I'm not a C expert. Likewise, I'm sure the C folks concentrated their efforts on the GCC threads. Now that they're all mixed together, it's necessary to view the threads themselves to ferret out which language each involves. Case in point is the thread titled CLKFREQ returns 4, which could easily have been a Spin issue but wasn't.
So ... admins, now that the salt and pepper is all blended together in one dish, is it possible to return each to its respective shaker? And if so, could you -- please?
Thanks,
-Phil
See my suggestion in #8.
Some forums have a 'recent discussions' filter, that does not care which exact topic it is filed under.
That seems a good way to ensure threads do not get overlooked, but are still easily found 6 months later.
It was not my intention to cause a calamity, but since the input continues...
I would have thought that the next logical step would be language separation, and then even further seperation of development and usage, as jmg pointed out. It is nice for folks to have a variety of languages to choose from when working with the Propeller, but separation by language would make usage and development so much easier to find pertinent documentation. Additionally, as Phil pointed out, help could be provided more efficiently.
I am sure that I have no clue of maintaining the itricacy of the Parallax forums, but I have never understood the need for condensement, with the exception of easier management. I have always been a research fanatic, and research is always easier when specific topics are separated.
EDIT: And perhaps there is a different perspective.... Perhaps a better defined forum could lead to growth, because potential users might be able to find pertinent documentation easier, instead of becoming flustered and leaving.
Well said.
My suggestion is to enable a "radiobutton"-group "SPIN", "PASM", "C" where you have to make a choice to klick one option,
otherwise you can't post. If you forgot to make the choice you get a message please activate "SPIN", "PASM", "C"
And then showing in the overview the same small symbols as in the OBEX
with filtering options: only show threads that are marked "SPIN", "PASM", "C"
Some feedback/contact-forms force its users to enter adress, valid zip-code, phone-number etc.
That's annoying me. But ONE SINGLE click is acceptable.
by the way: almost all options like "unsolved", "solved", bold, italic etc. seems to be vanished?
Can somebody confirm this? or might this be a problem of my browser?
The Content in the forum has evolved. So from time to time the forums software should evolve too.
I'm missing the various options like insert quotings, code, links, images etc.
There is still the option "quick reply" and "advanced". But the advanced-view is no longer advanced :-(
You have to be really a professional-poster because you have to keep the special codes in your head and type them
to get code-formatation etc.
The forum doesn't have to fullfil all of my personal special wishes. It should represent the requirements of the majority of the users
which will be a compromise. But I really don't understand most of the changes.
@Parallax: please explain your thoughts that lead to the decisions to make the forum look like it looks now
best regards
Stefan
A lot of what you're missing went away after an abortive attempt to upgrade the forum software. This is a temporary situation, albeit at this point a rather lengthy one. Nonetheless, I'm sure that the features you came to rely upon will return when the upgrade finally succeeds.
-Phil
1) Propeller chip relate questions
2) Propeller 2 related discussion
3) Spin/PASM related questions
4) C/C++ questions
5) Some variety of Forth thread
6) Some variety of BASIC related threads
7) Prop GCC specific issues
8) SimpleIDE / Propeller IDE issues
9) Everyday electronics questions
10) and so on.
Often questions span more than one of those domains. Often a question is phrased in terms of one domain turn out to have their solution in another. For example a PropellerIDE question is actually a prop-gcc issue or a Propeller issue.
Clearly we need 2 to the power 10 or more sub-forums to cover all the possibilities!
I'm not much into having too many sub-forums, regular gurus are not going to want to check all of them all the time. A user with a problem is not going to find it easier to find a solution. Forum search never works and a site search from Google is a better option. In which case it matters not which sub-forum you are on.
There is a reason why Stackoverflow.com is such a hit. Just type your problem into google and you often find a solution on stackoverflow pops up. Magic.
I don't know.
Clearly we need 2 to the power 8 different forums to handle all possible
OK, we may want to have a separate Forth forum -- maybe on a different server.
So for me this forum is one long stream of threads, and I select those I want to read and click the mark forum as read after that.
But then again 99.9% of the time I reply to posts. I rarely start new threads by myself. For those that do more of that it's natural to actually click the 'Forum' button and see all the subforums, to select one where to post. But for me as a reader it actually makes absolutely no difference..
-Tor
Fixing that would be a good start.
A problem with what New and single-huge-forum, is the longer development cycle stuff quickly gets buried.
As a topical example, I was going to suggest you start a thread in Prop GCC, about the numbers on your PASM heater_fft, vs GCC on Prop and GCC on ARM/RISC-V - but then I remembered Prop GCC is now swallowed into the larger babel-pit, and such technical threads would be buried very quickly.
No library puts all their books in a single large pile... instead they use search tools.
When discussing Spin/PASM on the Prop or C on the Prop, it's really no different from discussing two entirely different processors. There's scarcely any crossover of interest between the two, and the hasty decision to roll both sub-forums into one is only causing confusion. I continue to advocate for their re-separation. And this has nothing to do with any preference I may or may not have for one particular language over another. It's strictly a matter of practicality.
-Phil
-Phil
As I don't deal with C, I would rather not have to read them. "Got to keep 'um separated"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XN32lLUOBzQ