I emailed the person that designed this here Propeller a long time ago and asked him to explain it to me.
No response.
I am comfortable with leaving it there.
No response? No use Propeller hardware. Simple.We're talking quite a bit of it too.
I guess that is the trick.They got there money so why bother to explain how to use it.
Yep. That is our new position. No explanation? Then it can just sit here.
Explain so 'anybody can understand it'.
Please... write an email to Bill Gates and ask him to coach you on Windows. The person that designed the Propeller owns the company and is its chief architect (that is to say, he's very busy).
As is the case with every thread you've posted, the information you seek is available. Your refusal to accept Parallax products for what they are versus what you wish them to be is what stands in your way of success.
Are you saying they can't listen to what I'm saying and make it more palatable to conventional micro users
?
Dang, I could not let this go.
The die is cast with Propeller 1. It is what it is. There are no changes to be made. Doing that is very expensive. 6 figures just to think about it. I am not sure you realize that.
Propeller 2 incorporates a ton of ideas, including all you have put here. That work is proceeding and looks to complete soon.
Learning on P1 is not a waste. It has the core good stuff.
One of the important research findings from early research into compiler optimization techniques (and we're going back to Fortran from the early 1960s) was the observation that maybe 10% of any significant program takes 90% of the available processor time. Often there's a small loop or a few small loops that take well over 95% of available processor cycles. This fits well with the notion that most of any large program can be implemented using a reasonably efficient interpretive language (like Spin) while specific (after investigation) small pieces are implemented in the native instruction set (PASM). In the case of the Propeller where most I/O is implemented in software (as opposed to special purpose controllers for UARTs or I2C or SPI or video ...), the high speed "bit banging" is done using PASM while everything else is done using Spin. With that in mind, the small size of cog memory becomes reasonable. For example, an NTSC video driver for a 40x16 text-only display can be implemented in a little under 496 32-bit words including the screen buffer. The character set font table used is the one included in the on-chip ROM. Similarly, a 4-port UART with flow control and total throughput over 400K bps fits nicely in one cog's memory. The buffers are kept in hub memory.
"A micro with an interpreter is looked on as a 'toy' micro."
Interesting ... so why the beginnings of a shift from C and the Arduino IDE to Python (MicroPython and CircuitPython)? It certainly is working well for Adafruit in the hobby / prototype / education / small volume device market. Part of this is due to the increased capabilities of the microcontroller chips available (and I include Propeller 2 there) and part of it is due to a critical mass of interest and support in the open-source software development community for a serious Python interpreter.
@microcontrolleruser
Your view of a micro appears somewhat limited, yet you want to tell Chip/Parallax how to design the Propeller.
Many here have tried to help, pointing you to information, yet you seem not to take their help.
The Propeller (P1) and the Propeller 2 (P2) are extremely powerful micros which are understood by those with lots of micro experience. When you have that knowledge, then you views may be taken seriously.
Meanwhile, either go through the examples, or to put it more bluntly, move on to a more standard micro and learn that. Then come back when you might appreciate the Propellers advantages. Currently, you are just wasting lots of good peoples time.
There's no (or very little) PASM information in the on-line help files because it's not expected that either beginning users or moderately experienced users will need it or should need it. There's very little that you can't do in Spin and do more easily and adequately quickly than by using PASM. Any kind of native instruction set also needs a lot of support when used by beginners. Parallax's viewpoint is to do excellent support, patient, thorough, etc. for beginners at a level suitable for beginners and, when experienced users want to extend what they're doing, provide application notes and reference manuals and examples (like in the ObEx), encourage community members to write books, etc. There's more than enough information available from Parallax and various publishers to provide for the needs of otherwise advanced users.
Comments
Please... write an email to Bill Gates and ask him to coach you on Windows. The person that designed the Propeller owns the company and is its chief architect (that is to say, he's very busy).
As is the case with every thread you've posted, the information you seek is available. Your refusal to accept Parallax products for what they are versus what you wish them to be is what stands in your way of success.
'Your refusal to accept Parallax products for what they are versus what you wish them to be is what stands in your way of success. '
What? They are making a new Stamp 2 right now.
Are you saying they can't listen to what I'm saying and make it more palatable to conventional micro users?
They don't have to reinvent EVERYTHING to avoid getting sued for duplication.
If it's a truly original design they can use phrases like registers and PORT's.
They should drive a stake through the interpreter's heart once and for all.
A micro with an interpreter is looked on as a 'toy' micro.
If you are going to mix it up with ARM and Microchip you have to compile the code.
'The Great Oz has spoken!'
An interpreter is slow.
In today's world making a slow micro is not a big selling point.
Don't get me wrong. I will use the Propeller. I am just not going to hide my head in the sand while I'm using it.
Don't try to tell me what is real and what isn't.
Please let us know where that information is at. I'm curious.
Dang, I could not let this go.
The die is cast with Propeller 1. It is what it is. There are no changes to be made. Doing that is very expensive. 6 figures just to think about it. I am not sure you realize that.
Propeller 2 incorporates a ton of ideas, including all you have put here. That work is proceeding and looks to complete soon.
Learning on P1 is not a waste. It has the core good stuff.
'Please let us know where that information is at. I'm curious.'
Publison. I meant Propeller 2.
You should be happy to know I am just going to take a chill pill and use Spin.
Innocent mistake. All is fine.
Interesting ... so why the beginnings of a shift from C and the Arduino IDE to Python (MicroPython and CircuitPython)? It certainly is working well for Adafruit in the hobby / prototype / education / small volume device market. Part of this is due to the increased capabilities of the microcontroller chips available (and I include Propeller 2 there) and part of it is due to a critical mass of interest and support in the open-source software development community for a serious Python interpreter.
Thank you Publison, Mike
Put Propeller Tool icon back on desktop.
That's enough for now.
Thanks for the info!
This is very reassuring. Propeller and Spin.
When you see there is no assembler in the Help that is a bad sign for using assembler.
We will 'go with the flow' and just use Spin for now.
Your view of a micro appears somewhat limited, yet you want to tell Chip/Parallax how to design the Propeller.
Many here have tried to help, pointing you to information, yet you seem not to take their help.
The Propeller (P1) and the Propeller 2 (P2) are extremely powerful micros which are understood by those with lots of micro experience. When you have that knowledge, then you views may be taken seriously.
Meanwhile, either go through the examples, or to put it more bluntly, move on to a more standard micro and learn that. Then come back when you might appreciate the Propellers advantages. Currently, you are just wasting lots of good peoples time.