Please add these features

davids

Hello everyone,

Just a quick post.· You'll most like get tired before you finish it.

I haven't really used basic stamp much any more, I still program short programs in it to get larger programs debuged in MPLAB.· I wouldn't like to draw reposts like. ·"This is not a simulator/complier" its not the point a user should be able to run a program in the development·enviroment stage·and see the·code extract with pins being openly visible to the·user, a timer function to see how long·a subroutine has taken to extract.·In respect to breakpoints, great idea love it.

I'd·greatly imbrace·a variable clock speed accross the BS2 range,· maybe allow the user to·select the speed of the processor (2Mhz to 20Mhz) to start with.··A function to preform interrupts on maybe two pins, maybe Add a INTERRUPT PIN (A or or even both.


PS hope I don't step on too many·fingers,

David

Bean

David,
I think you can do all of that with the SX microcontroller. Using SX/B it is somewhat similar to PBasic (with some pluses and some minuses).
You can see the code generated.
Timer function - SX has periodic interrupts or you can use SXSim to see how many clocks a routine would take.
Breakpoints - SX has got 'em, along with variable WATCHes
Variable clock speed - SX can run from 32KHz to 75MHz
Interrupt Pins - SX has got 8 of them.

Bean.

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
"SX-Video·Module" Now available from Parallax for only $28.95

http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=30012

"SX-Video OSD module" Now available from Parallax for only·$49.95
http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=30015

Product web site: www.sxvm.com

"Ability may get you to the top, but it takes character to keep you there."
·

LoopyByteloose

David,
I don't think anyone is easily insulted here. The PICs are great, but they have their own draw backs.

One is they have an immense amount of documentation to read. If you are just trying to learn assembly, the many different platforms and variations might really bog you down [noparse][[/noparse]12 bit, 16 bit, 18 bit and so on] The SX comes in merely two versions with the same about of bits [noparse][[/noparse]memory paging is doubled and different].

The other drawback is that you really have to depend on switching hardware to get the functions you want.

Sometimes that is great because you find the right chip and the hardware makes it easy to code. At other times, you might wish that you could make a Virtual Peripheral (tm) in software [noparse][[/noparse]actually you can do that with a PIC, but where do you learn to program Virtual Peripherals (tm) and where do you get the speed to really make them buzz along?].

I think that you will find SX Assembly a bit easier to code too. The mneumonics are more obvious and you don't have that pesky little direction Bit on move instructions.

Still, you can see that I am trying to learn both. After all, nothing bars learning as much as contempt prior to investigation.

As you can see, I put in the (tm) because Virtual Peripherals is a trademarked and original concept of the SX.· You are learning it at the source and not via a second hand interpretation adapted to the PIC.

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
"When all think alike, no one is thinking very much.' - Walter Lippmann (1889-1974)

······································································ Warm regards,····· G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse]·黃鶴 ]·in Taiwan

Post Edited (Kramer) : 2/4/2006 3:24:27 PM GMT

Paul Baker

While it wouldn't be software selectable, getting the BS2 OEM board, and installing a socket for the resonator you can swap out the resonator for different speed options. One caveat to this is, the code on the interpreter was written with a specific resonator frequency in mind. Since the interpreter is fetching the PBASIC instructions from EEPROM via an I2C interface, the maximum clock speed for the EEPROM must not be exceeded, and since you would be scaling the clock speed without altering the interpreter code, there will be a maximum speed you can run it at, however there should not be an issue with dropping the speed.

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
·1+1=10

Kevin Wood

One thing that I think Parallax could do for users interested in transitioning to the SX would be to offfer an SX-Stamp. It would be pin compatible with the BS2 series, but would be programmed with the SX-Key. It could use whatever SX chip was appropriate, and the programming headers would be on the stamp, so a user could plug it into any board that uses a BS2.

I don't think it would really cost that much to develop, just modify one of the current BS2 series. But for the user, it would offer the ease of use of the BS2, and the horsepower of the SX when needed. Sure it would cost more than individual SX chips, but for those not interested in starting with a discrete SX chip, it would be a great upgrade.

Edit:

If it isn't feasible to put the programming headers on the chip for dev-board compatibility, an SX-Key to Serial adapter could be used. But the general idea is being able to pull the BS2 and pop in the SX-Stamp with no hardware mods necessary.

Post Edited (Kevin Wood) : 2/4/2006 4:34:50 PM GMT

Jon Williams

The problem with an SX-Stamp module is that -- in order for customers to have a variable clock speed -- is that we would not be able to put the resonator on the module, it would have to be off-board so you would immediately loose compatibility with the Stamp module you want to replace. As a matter of historical note, the original BS2sx module had four [noparse][[/noparse]tiny] pads right below the SX chip that would allow the module to be reprogrammed by the user. The pads were ultimately removed because we had not found nor developed a beginner-friendly compiler. When SX/B came along we had already made the change.

So the question is... if we put the pads back onto the SX module, would you (or anyone) actually purchase it -- sans PBASIC interpreter -- for use in your own projects and would you accept a fixed clock frequency (likely 20 MHz)? SX/B would be quite useful, you'd have the RB and RC ports, with RA being used for the quasi-serial (Stamp programming) port and I2C interface to the EEPROM.

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Jon Williams
Applications Engineer, Parallax

Kevin Wood

Even with a fixed frequency, it would offer a huge performance boost for the price. I started thinking about this some time ago when I noticed that some posters were looking for a bit more ease of use from the SX.

I think the BS2 success has shown the viability of the module format, and I think consumers would also see the value. Some benefits would be compatability with current dev boards, increased performance and flexibility, and greater ease of use for the average consumer. One potential market is the educational market, which could offer ASM/C courseware using the same BoEs already purchased, just by upgrading the Stamp module. For the EE types, the SX chips are still available for OEM, or to get full access to I/Os.

I personally think that there are users that might be interested in the performance that the SX gives, but aren't sure about the technical ability overhead that comes with it. There is a lot more that the user needs to be aware of. Some people are interested in the details of the process, others only want the end results.

I'm not trying to talk Parallax into anything, but I do think the idea has merit.

Bean

Jon,
A problem. If you put the 20Mhz resonator on the SX-Stamp you will not be able to debug code [noparse]:([/noparse]
I think the SX52 ConCarne had a 3 pin socket on it for the resonator. That would work [noparse]:)[/noparse]
Bean.

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
"SX-Video·Module" Now available from Parallax for only $28.95

http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=30012

"SX-Video OSD module" Now available from Parallax for only·$49.95
http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=30015

Product web site: www.sxvm.com

"Ability may get you to the top, but it takes character to keep you there."
·

Jon Williams

I don't see that as a *problem* since most students don't want to learn to use the debugger, anyway, and are happy to work through the program using SX-Sim. There will aways be trades, and I agree with Kevin that have a programmable SX-Stamp would likely attract some attention. The only *problem* really, will be getting new folks past the learning curve -- PBASIC hides a lot of gory details about SX programming.

Just so that I'm not misquoted, my agreement with Kevin's position does not mean this will become a product. Producing modules is expensive and we may not be able to justify the expense for a low-volume product.

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Jon Williams
Applications Engineer, Parallax

davids

I have just downloaded the software for SX chip and it (to me anyway) suffers the same problem as BS2's software. I beleive that new programmers and old dogs would like to run programs inside the software without having to attach a module SX / BS2 (maybe a free 30 day trail period could be used). Maybe a plot program could be written to test interest. I sure that you will find that most people interested in programming would simply give in to headacres and time wasting problems and not bother again.


TRUE if you want to use basic stamp software you must buy the hardware e.g BOE BS2 stamps.
TRUE you can't use a different simulator to test code before writting to a chip.
TRUE you can't even debug a program without the board in.

Regards

David

Jon Williams

There is a free simulator available: SX-Sim. You'll find it in the SX forum.

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Jon Williams
Applications Engineer, Parallax

Kevin Wood

Jon,

I think it would be possible to simply use the BS2p24, using an unprogrammed SX chip & leaving off the interpreter. Jumpers/wires could be soldered on if need be to tie the interpreter pads to ground or other locations. If this is possible, the impact production-wise would be minimal.

I don't think you would have a problem with the learning curve issue. Parallax is already working on that with SX/B, and all of the current SX efforts. Whereas SX/B is an effort to make the software side easier to transition, the Stamp format would (IMO) do the same from a hardware perspective.

Jon Williams

If we do it, we'll probably use the BS2sx (SX28) platform to keep costs and PCB space down -- we need to put programming pads back on the PCB and figure out a customer-friendly way to attach the SX-Key.

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Jon Williams
Applications Engineer, Parallax