I am seriously considering dumping the PIC and going with the ARM.

 The superior ARM interrupt handling has finally caught up with the
 Superkim.
 It has only taken 40 years :)

 Everybody agreed the 6502 was great at handling interrupts. The
 predecessor of the
 ARM was the Acorn and that was patterned after the 6502.
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture

 The 6502 was used in a zillion hard disk drives back in the old days.

 Interrupts are most important when it comes to controlling mechanical
 devices.

 I love it.

 For the past month I have been investigating new processors in a highly
 competitivemarket place. A very complex subject.

 Paul Lamar

 My check is in the mail now.

 Zoltan


 The ARM appears to be winning. It is found in just about every cell phone
 and tablet
 on the market.Mikro has a BASIC for it but the manual is not yet
 available.
 Lots of examples of code are however.

 Paul Lamar

 Sorry about the Bascom. I checked with them and they only support 8
 bit AVR. So not support for it with 32 bit.

 I would definitely go with your suggestion on ARM. Since it is very
 readily available in the market.

 Henry

 Have a look at NXP processors.  They are ARM.  The have free dev tools and
 low cost dev boards.  A very powerful and fast processor is the LPC 1769
 Digi-Key sells them.  There are smaller versions of the chip like the
 LPC11xx  series.  They are screaming fast, simple development, and lots of
 sample and peripheral software.

 Cost is reasonable.  Lots of ports available.  Counters, PWM, A/D.  It's
 got
 it all.

 Rick Irwin
 using a 20b rotary on a Cozy.

 Thanks for tip Rick. I have some stuff (docs) on the NXP ARM already. What
 do you
 think of the Ti version? That is the version Mikro is supporting with
 their BASIC
 compiler.

 Paul Lamar

Basic typically is slower (code running time) than C or C++.  The best is
Assembly.  But development time and debugging is generally slower with
Assembly.  There are good C Gui systems available.  If I were firing and
engine I would use Assembly or C code.

Also would use interrupts.

Rick
20b Cozy in the makin'

That was conventional wisdom but not necessarily so. I have been hearing that since
BASIC was mostly interpreted back before the Quick BASIC compiler. Those days are
over as most BASICs are now compiled. I wrote an aircraft moving map program in QB
compiled that updates the screen once a second using a 8088 in 1990. The limatation
was the data rate coming in from the GPS.

It is theoretically  possible to write a BASIC compiler that is just as efficient as
a C compiler.  For example what is to stop one from translating BASIC syntax to C
syntax and then compiling the resultant C.

How one instructs the compiler is not directly related to how well the compiler
converts that to executable code. If you feel I am wrong can you give me an example?

Paul Lamar


-- 
The Rotary Engine News Letter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://www.rotaryeng.net
You Tube key word PaulLamar2
Copyright 1998-2012 All world wide rights reserved.