Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
memory expansion — Parallax Forums

memory expansion

ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
edited 2003-04-02 16:18 in General Discussion
the other day i was reading some FAQ documentation on the parallax
site. I found two things on memory expansion one said data memory
expansion was possible but program memory was not. What is the
difference, does anybody know? is it possible to hook up a drive of
some sort (hard drive, cd drive, especially a cd type drive) up to a
stamp to store code that can be used/processed by the chip?

Comments

  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-03-30 00:30

    Original Message
    From: "flyfatmanfly2000" <flyfatmanfly2000@y...>


    | the other day i was reading some FAQ documentation on the parallax
    | site. I found two things on memory expansion one said data memory
    | expansion was possible but program memory was not. What is the
    | difference, does anybody know? is it possible to hook up a drive of
    | some sort (hard drive, cd drive, especially a cd type drive) up to a
    | stamp to store code that can be used/processed by the chip?

    Nope... There's no way to expand the program memory. What you see is what
    you got...

    - Robert
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-03-30 00:43
    Well, strictly speaking, yes, it is possible. Highly doubtful you'd want to
    though. Basically your stamp program would be an interpreter program and
    you'd store program code on an external memory device. Pull in the opcodes
    and do the voodoo magic on it.

    The stamp itself is really a PIC microcontroller doing what I describe. It's
    program is a PBasic interpreter and it pulls the code from external eeprom
    for execution. This is why the stamp is slower than other controllers.If you
    are capable of writing an interpreter that'd run on a stamp then you'd most
    likely use a pic or avr controller instead and wouldn't need the stamp.

    My 'lectronic Newb site http://members.shaw.ca/pmeloy/
    Original Message
    From: "flyfatmanfly2000" <flyfatmanfly2000@y...>
    To: <basicstamps@yahoogroups.com>
    Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2003 4:17 PM
    Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] memory expansion


    > the other day i was reading some FAQ documentation on the parallax
    > site. I found two things on memory expansion one said data memory
    > expansion was possible but program memory was not. What is the
    > difference, does anybody know? is it possible to hook up a drive of
    > some sort (hard drive, cd drive, especially a cd type drive) up to a
    > stamp to store code that can be used/processed by the chip?
    >
    >
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the Subject and
    Body of the message will be ignored.
    >
    >
    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    >
    >
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-03-31 19:36
    Solutions Cubed sells an 8K SRAM module, which you can read and write
    using the SEROUT/SERIN commands. (Note external 8-pin 8K to 32K
    EEPROM also exist)

    The BasicMicro 'Atom' is pin-compatible with the Stamp, and has 368
    bytes of RAM. Their Beta 'Atom Pro' has 2000 bytes of RAM -- but
    their manual needs revision (will be done soon).

    The Stamp itself uses 'Registers' for RAM, and the Stamp PBasic
    only 'knows' about that RAM, so it is not internally expandable.

    AllanL

    --- In basicstamps@yahoogroups.com, Pat M <pmeloy@s...> wrote:
    > Well, strictly speaking, yes, it is possible. Highly doubtful you'd
    want to
    > though. Basically your stamp program would be an interpreter
    program and
    > you'd store program code on an external memory device. Pull in the
    opcodes
    > and do the voodoo magic on it.
    >
    > The stamp itself is really a PIC microcontroller doing what I
    describe. It's
    > program is a PBasic interpreter and it pulls the code from external
    eeprom
    > for execution. This is why the stamp is slower than other
    controllers.If you
    > are capable of writing an interpreter that'd run on a stamp then
    you'd most
    > likely use a pic or avr controller instead and wouldn't need the
    stamp.
    >
    > My 'lectronic Newb site http://members.shaw.ca/pmeloy/
    >
    Original Message
    > From: "flyfatmanfly2000" <flyfatmanfly2000@y...>
    > To: <basicstamps@yahoogroups.com>
    > Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2003 4:17 PM
    > Subject: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] memory expansion
    >
    >
    > > the other day i was reading some FAQ documentation on the parallax
    > > site. I found two things on memory expansion one said data memory
    > > expansion was possible but program memory was not. What is the
    > > difference, does anybody know? is it possible to hook up a drive
    of
    > > some sort (hard drive, cd drive, especially a cd type drive) up
    to a
    > > stamp to store code that can be used/processed by the chip?
    > >
    > >
    > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, just send mail to:
    > > basicstamps-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    > > from the same email address that you subscribed. Text in the
    Subject and
    > Body of the message will be ignored.
    > >
    > >
    > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    > >
    > >
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-03-31 20:01

    Original Message
    From: "Pat M" <pmeloy@s...>
    | Well, strictly speaking, yes, it is possible. Highly doubtful you'd want
    to
    | though. Basically your stamp program would be an interpreter program and
    | you'd store program code on an external memory device. Pull in the opcodes
    | and do the voodoo magic on it.
    |
    | The stamp itself is really a PIC microcontroller doing what I describe.
    It's
    | program is a PBasic interpreter and it pulls the code from external eeprom
    | for execution. This is why the stamp is slower than other controllers.If
    you
    | are capable of writing an interpreter that'd run on a stamp then you'd
    most
    | likely use a pic or avr controller instead and wouldn't need the stamp.
    |
    | My 'lectronic Newb site http://members.shaw.ca/pmeloy/

    I hadn't thought of that!
    As you say, though, you may as well get yourself a PIC and have it interpret
    PBasic from a huge external EEPROM, as try to do it with a Stamp. I'm not
    sure you could even use the whole PBasic instruction set with a Stamp-run
    interpreter, simply because of the limited memory!

    - Robert
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-04-01 15:28
    Well, this is the value of the Stamp.
    Parallax has done all the crufty hacking
    with getting a Development System, small
    Operating System, Compiler, EEPROM Burner,
    into a 24 pin module. They've solved all
    the problems of DC power, Brown-outs,
    WatchDog Timers, noise on power for you.
    They've even incorporated a 232 Tx/Rx
    driver set for the programming port. They've
    developed PBasic, a small p-coded basic to
    make the best use of limited resources.

    And all you have to do is fork over your
    $50 or so to have all of this at your
    disposal in a few days. Yes, you could
    do ALL of this yourself with off-the-shelf
    PIC components -- but it wouldn't cost $50,
    more like $2,000, and you wouldn't have it
    in a few days. BTW, Parallax DOES have the
    SX processor which may do some of what you
    want in a faster package, in assembly code.
    Again, not $50.00, but more like $250.00


    --- In basicstamps@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Ussery" <uavscience@f...>
    wrote:
    >
    >
    Original Message
    > From: "Pat M" <pmeloy@s...>
    > | Well, strictly speaking, yes, it is possible. Highly doubtful
    you'd want
    > to
    > | though. Basically your stamp program would be an interpreter
    program and
    > | you'd store program code on an external memory device. Pull in
    the opcodes
    > | and do the voodoo magic on it.
    > |
    > | The stamp itself is really a PIC microcontroller doing what I
    describe.
    > It's
    > | program is a PBasic interpreter and it pulls the code from
    external eeprom
    > | for execution. This is why the stamp is slower than other
    controllers.If
    > you
    > | are capable of writing an interpreter that'd run on a stamp then
    you'd
    > most
    > | likely use a pic or avr controller instead and wouldn't need the
    stamp.
    > |
    > | My 'lectronic Newb site http://members.shaw.ca/pmeloy/
    >
    > I hadn't thought of that!
    > As you say, though, you may as well get yourself a PIC and have it
    interpret
    > PBasic from a huge external EEPROM, as try to do it with a Stamp.
    I'm not
    > sure you could even use the whole PBasic instruction set with a
    Stamp-run
    > interpreter, simply because of the limited memory!
    >
    > - Robert
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-04-01 16:20
    You can get into AVR's cheaper, and there are even Basic compilers available
    for free or a small fee, but you still have to build up some support
    circuitry and tweak stuff to do things a Stamp will do out of the box. And
    there is still the matter of development time when you need to use an AVR
    not supported by the higher languages.

    I have spent many hours recently messing with a Tiny15 to make a battery
    monitor and self-calibrating line-follower module that will steer a servo.
    Writing in Assembler, with minimal syntax checking and no debugging tools
    gets very interesting, even on simple projects.

    On the other hand, using a BS2SX, it took only a couple of hours to get my
    big robot to dead-reckon the hallways on the Trinity Firefighting contest,
    and most of the time was spent tweaking the distance values to make accurate
    movements. And this unoptimized code took maybe 1/3 of one program segment.

    There may be some limitations to a Stamp, but chances are someone has a
    work-around and the resources, support and documentation available for free
    greatly offset both this and the cost of the product.

    Original Message

    > Well, this is the value of the Stamp.
    > Parallax has done all the crufty hacking
    > with getting a Development System, small
    > Operating System, Compiler, EEPROM Burner,
    > into a 24 pin module. They've solved all
    > the problems of DC power, Brown-outs,
    > WatchDog Timers, noise on power for you.
    > They've even incorporated a 232 Tx/Rx
    > driver set for the programming port. They've
    > developed PBasic, a small p-coded basic to
    > make the best use of limited resources.
    >
    > And all you have to do is fork over your
    > $50 or so to have all of this at your
    > disposal in a few days. Yes, you could
    > do ALL of this yourself with off-the-shelf
    > PIC components -- but it wouldn't cost $50,
    > more like $2,000, and you wouldn't have it
    > in a few days. BTW, Parallax DOES have the
    > SX processor which may do some of what you
    > want in a faster package, in assembly code.
    > Again, not $50.00, but more like $250.00
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-04-01 21:14

    Original Message
    From: "Allan Lane" <allan.lane@h...>
    | Well, this is the value of the Stamp.
    | Parallax has done all the crufty hacking
    | with getting a Development System, small
    | Operating System, Compiler, EEPROM Burner,
    | into a 24 pin module. They've solved all
    | the problems of DC power, Brown-outs,
    | WatchDog Timers, noise on power for you.
    | They've even incorporated a 232 Tx/Rx
    | driver set for the programming port. They've
    | developed PBasic, a small p-coded basic to
    | make the best use of limited resources.
    |
    | And all you have to do is fork over your
    | $50 or so to have all of this at your
    | disposal in a few days. Yes, you could
    | do ALL of this yourself with off-the-shelf
    | PIC components -- but it wouldn't cost $50,
    | more like $2,000, and you wouldn't have it
    | in a few days. BTW, Parallax DOES have the
    | SX processor which may do some of what you
    | want in a faster package, in assembly code.
    | Again, not $50.00, but more like $250.00

    I totally agree! I'm not disputing any of this. I simply meant that, if the
    Stamp won't fit the bill (because of limited speed, memory, whatever), but
    you still want the ease of use, easy integration, etc. of the Stamp, you
    could make your own Stamp-like uP pretty easily.

    BTW, aren't the watchdog timer and brownout part of the SX uP (at least on
    the BS2SX)?

    Don't get the impression that I don't like the Stamps, and don't appreciate
    what Parallax has done! I just know the limitations of the Stamps.
    Please note that many of the limitations I've encountered with the Stamp are
    self-induced, either by laziness or lack of skill. I'm sure that someone
    like the revered Tracy Allen could find a way around nearly any of them! [noparse]:o[/noparse])

    - Robert
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-04-02 00:04
    Yep, I'm using AVRs in my current project. Definately NOT for (total) newb's
    or the faint of heart. Had to make my own buffered programming cable and add
    my own Max232 transciever for the RS232 connection. Supply my own crystal,
    purchase Bascom AVR basic since I'm C-o-phobic (instead of the free stamp
    basic). Even then I've done things like pulled my hair out for a week
    wondering why my $300 graphic LCD wouldn't work and it turns out to be a
    fuse setting (JTAG is enabled by default on the Mega32). Been at this
    project for 6 months....

    Stamp=Tricycle with training wheels (quintcycle?)
    AVR=Flying a Harrier AV8B
    Pic=Harrier but blindfolded!

    My original point still stands though, if you're capable of writing your own
    interpreter for a microcontroller, you wouldn't be using a stamp for it.
    Then again, I doubt that's a market that Parallax is aiming at!

    My 'lectronic Newb site http://members.shaw.ca/pmeloy/
    Original Message
    From: "Rodent" <daweasel@s...>
    To: <basicstamps@yahoogroups.com>
    Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 7:20 AM
    Subject: Re: [noparse][[/noparse]basicstamps] Re: memory expansion


    > You can get into AVR's cheaper, and there are even Basic compilers
    available
    > for free or a small fee, but you still have to build up some support
    > circuitry and tweak stuff to do things a Stamp will do out of the box. And
    > there is still the matter of development time when you need to use an AVR
    > not supported by the higher languages.
  • ArchiverArchiver Posts: 46,084
    edited 2003-04-02 16:18

    From: "Pat M" <pmeloy@

    -snip-
    > Stamp=Tricycle with training wheels (quintcycle?)
    > AVR=Flying a Harrier AV8B
    > Pic=Harrier but blindfolded!
    Well put, but I'd like to add that the stamp is an excellent design and
    debugging platform to develop with. We use the BS1 for many
    small products, and the BS2-i for things that require industrial temp range, and
    have used the BS2P-40 for large scale products. The
    turn around time from concept to prototype is of greater savings labor hour$
    wise than the price difference. Pics are cost efficient
    only if you ignore the development time or are looking at producing thousands of
    units. Many of our products sell a hundred or less
    per year, and the stamp platform makes customization as simple as e-mailing a
    flash update.

    KF4HAZ - Lonnie
Sign In or Register to comment.