Future of propeller 1

First of all I think the propeller 1 is great microcontroller!

It would also be great to have the propeller 1 with various combinations of:
-more ram,
-more cogs,
-more pins,
-flash.

I know about almost finished propeller 2, but as electronics hobbyist, it seams out of my league. Of course something like the flip module (which is also great!) with propeller 2 would be nice, but it would probably cost a lot.

I believe also that a modern c++ compiler is a must. And the lack of any (close to the metal) c++ compiler for the propeller 2 sets back its usefulness.

So what do you think?

Comments

  • For the size of memory that the prop2 has, C is as good as C++. That said, the fussy will make enough noise and C++ will be coming anyway. It's very early days still.

    You're right about the chip package though. I think there will be a smaller package with less pins at a later date that won't have the thermal pad but, until then, most people will be buying prebuilt dev boards.
    "We suspect that ALMA will allow us to observe this rare form of CO in many other discs.
    By doing that, we can more accurately measure their mass, and determine whether
    scientists have systematically been underestimating how much matter they contain."
  • jmgjmg Posts: 13,937
    byrtolet wrote: »
    First of all I think the propeller 1 is great microcontroller!

    It would also be great to have the propeller 1 with various combinations of:
    -more ram,
    -more cogs,
    -more pins,
    -flash.

    I know about almost finished propeller 2, but as electronics hobbyist, it seams out of my league. Of course something like the flip module (which is also great!) with propeller 2 would be nice, but it would probably cost a lot.

    Did you look at the P2D2 module ? That is very like FLiP, and there is no reason for that to 'cost a lot'.

    I looked at a DIP64 0.9" 'larger flip' but that's always going to drop some IO pins, and is getting 'bulky.
    My personal preference for a module is a P2D2-size, with a RaspPi pinout, as that allows many Display modules to connect directly, and allows a P2 to slave to a Pi.

    byrtolet wrote: »
    I believe also that a modern c++ compiler is a must. And the lack of any (close to the metal) c++ compiler for the propeller 2 sets back its usefulness.
    So what do you think?
    P2 already has an impressive range of software, and more will come. Software is easy to add.


  • The Propeller 1 chip and the FLiP module are my "go-to" microcontroller chips. Rugged, easy on power usage, priced right, configurable, ease of programming with the tried and true Propeller Tools. Yes, I have run out of memory on occasions, but I will always run out of memory no matter how much you give me!!! Most of the time the memory issue is feature creep. Currently I have two commercial products in the pipe line using the Prop FLiP module. Like with the current P2 development, these manufacturing & business things are challenging and just take time to come to market. I will be at most major Hamfests and Maker Faires in the near future with products using the Prop FLiP modules...
  • Can't believe that Beau's high-speed net hasn't taken off. Darned good idea, methinks.
    Failure is not an option...it's bundled with the software.
  • RaymanRayman Posts: 9,716
    edited 2019-08-28 - 23:46:31
    Doesn't PropGCC include a C++ compiler? I think it does...
    Also, Chip used to say that P2 would cost about the same as P1. I find that hard to believe, but we'll see...

    Also, P2 has already BASIC and microPython. So, I'm pretty sure it will be inviting to hobbyists at some point...
    I think it's going to have BlocklyProp too later on down the road...
    Prop Info and Apps: http://www.rayslogic.com/
  • Rayman wrote: »
    Doesn't PropGCC include a C++ compiler?

    PropGCC has indeed a c++ compiler, although rather dated one.

    I was speaking about things I need - either a more powerful propeller 1, for which propgcc will work, or a propeller 2 with, a proper compiler, and a proper package/module.

  • byrtolet wrote: »
    Rayman wrote: »
    Doesn't PropGCC include a C++ compiler?

    PropGCC has indeed a c++ compiler, although rather dated one.

    I was speaking about things I need - either a more powerful propeller 1, for which propgcc will work, or a propeller 2 with, a proper compiler, and a proper package/module.
    P2 does have the RISC-V C/C++ compiler that is up to date. As Eric has mentioned many times, it runs at nearly native P2 speed since the RISC-V instructions are JIT compiled into P2 PASM code.

  • David Betz wrote: »
    byrtolet wrote: »
    Rayman wrote: »
    Doesn't PropGCC include a C++ compiler?

    PropGCC has indeed a c++ compiler, although rather dated one.

    I was speaking about things I need - either a more powerful propeller 1, for which propgcc will work, or a propeller 2 with, a proper compiler, and a proper package/module.
    P2 does have the RISC-V C/C++ compiler that is up to date. As Eric has mentioned many times, it runs at nearly native P2 speed since the RISC-V instructions are JIT compiled into P2 PASM code.

    The only thing I'd take issue with is the "nearly native", since on a lot of benchmarks it's faster than all the other ("native") P2 compilers, sometimes by quite a lot :).
  • ersmith wrote: »
    David Betz wrote: »
    byrtolet wrote: »
    Rayman wrote: »
    Doesn't PropGCC include a C++ compiler?

    PropGCC has indeed a c++ compiler, although rather dated one.

    I was speaking about things I need - either a more powerful propeller 1, for which propgcc will work, or a propeller 2 with, a proper compiler, and a proper package/module.
    P2 does have the RISC-V C/C++ compiler that is up to date. As Eric has mentioned many times, it runs at nearly native P2 speed since the RISC-V instructions are JIT compiled into P2 PASM code.

    The only thing I'd take issue with is the "nearly native", since on a lot of benchmarks it's faster than all the other ("native") P2 compilers, sometimes by quite a lot :).
    Sorry. What I meant by "nearly native" is nearly as fast as native P2 assembly code would be. In any case, it's performance is impressive.

  • Sounded like you need Linux for the risc compiler for p2, right?
    Prop Info and Apps: http://www.rayslogic.com/
  • Rayman wrote: »
    Sounded like you need Linux for the risc compiler for p2, right?

    I think we're starting to wander off topic, so I'll respond at: http://forums.parallax.com/discussion/170295/riscvp2-a-c-and-c-compiler-for-p2#latest
  • Hello,

    I din't know RISC-V C/C++ gcc compiler brings near native performance on P2. Thank you for pointing that out.

    So I'll just join the group looking forward to P2's production...
Sign In or Register to comment.