Empathy List Archives

time-nuts@lists.febo.com

Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement

Re: [time-nuts] favorite microcontroller module?

Didier Juges

Fri, Feb 22, 2008 1:06 AM

Most of my projects have a serial port and a standard comm interface. Once I
get that up and running, I use it for debugging.

That's the point where I start to breathe better too :-)

I have had my share of grief with emulators also. It was not enough that
they cost $1,000's and required these monster cables such that sometimes
they did not even fit on the target board... They had their own temperament.

On the other hand, emulator or not, I had to squeeze my brain a lot more
when things did not work. Now, I put a breakpoint or two, and in little
time, the problem is usually identified.

This is a case where I definitely do not miss the old days.

I also agree with you that decent C compilers and sufficient resources on
modern chips have made assembly mostly a thing of the past. Except for a
very recent project where I had to design a circuit that generates a number
of interlaced sync pulses with precise timing. I could have done it with a
PLD, but it was simpler to use a Silabs uC, with its built-in stable clock
at 25 MHz. Using assembly allowed me to keep timing to within the 40nS cycle
time. For what I wanted to do, the compiler generated more code, simply
because it was the wrong tool for the task. The Silabs solution was 1 chip,
instead of two for the PLD. Since I used another Silabs chip in the project,
it also simplified programming (same tool).

Didier

-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com
[mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Harris
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 9:37 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] favorite microcontroller module?

Hi Didier,
.., I can use a pin that ordinarily

would run an LED as a diagnostic port.

I had forgotten these tricks, which were the norm 20 years

ago when I

was too lazy to pull the 6805 emulator.

It's sort of funny, 20 years ago, I was flush with emulators,
and used them
for most of my development. The had their place back then,
as my projects
were spiraling out of control in terms of complexity.

Now, I just do PICS, and don't need such things. I can debug
most effectively with either simple diagnostic messages, or a scope.

I don't miss how code that would work with the emulator
bombed without the emulator ... and vice versa.

Now that I am used to the full debug

capability of the Silabs chips, which uses only the reset and one
other pin on the smaller chips (the other pin being able to share
debug and normal duty), I don't have to resort to tricks

like this :-)

You get that capability even with their $18 USB based "development
system" that's the size of a stick of gum.

PIC's will do the same thing. I just haven't had the need to yet.

Many would say this is a religious issue, but I would disagree.
The 6 and 8 pin PICS are simply awesome in what they can do in
virtually no space. The tools are cheap, or free. The PIC's are
cheap too.

No religion involved, I think the PIC line is unequalled

when it comes

to the variations and features that are available in the small pin
count packages. Silabs only has half a handful of chips in DIP
packages (is two the same as half a handful?) but they have some
pretty awesome parts in SM packages that are 3x3 mm or so

(they start

at 11 pins, 10 + a tab), so if you do not do the soldering by hand,
you can't complain that there is no room for a powerful uC.

True, they have made a number of wins.

I am getting familiar with the AVR line simply because a

number of my

friends use them and speak highly of the architecture, but

in general,

I try to stay with open, multi-sourced architectures, so

the 8051 has

a leg up on PICs and AVRs from the start. I made that decision when
Motorola forced me out of the 68HC05, like so many others.

I have not

regretted it. Motorola was not able to get me in the HC08,

even though they gave it a good try.

I tried to learn the HC10, but I could find no compelling
reason to learn yet another processor.

was not going down that road again. Burn me once, shame on

you, burn

me twice, shame on me (or is it: don't burn me again?)

The Silabs chips start at a couple of $, so they are out of

the sub-$1

market for sure. That's fine with me, I don't mind paying

an extra $

for the features and convenience :-)

Like many things, uC are tools. The tool that you are the most
comfortable with is often the best choice, for practical

reasons, even

more so when you have to make a living out of it. For me, it's
important to know that when I start a project, I can finish

it within

schedule and within budget. My familiarity with the 8051

and many of

its variants (and my favorite compiler, and the ton and a half of
available code) gives me that capability, but as you

pointed out, it's

not the only way. I understand you feel the same about the

PIC. That's perfectly OK.

Now, if you want an evening of fun, buy a Silabs toolstick

and a base

adapter (about $28 + shipping from Mouser) and you have

everything you

need (hardware and software, including demo version of the Keil C
compiler) for a fun uC project. Please note the Keil C51

compiler can

be replaced with the free and excellent SDCC compiler.

I have one around here someplace. I was frustrated because I
couldn't get it
to work under linux and wine. CCS has a native linux
compiler, and their windows
compiler works nicely under wine. I am having some trouble
with Microchip's programmer under the current wine release,
but it has worked in the past, I'll get it working again.

Here is an example of what you can do in an evening:
http://www.ko4bb.com/Test_Equipment/AFSignalGenerator/SigGen.html

Your server seems to be down right now.

-Chuck Harris

time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe,
go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.9 - Release Date:
2/20/2008 12:00 AM

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.9 - Release Date: 2/20/2008 12:00
AM

Most of my projects have a serial port and a standard comm interface. Once I get that up and running, I use it for debugging. That's the point where I start to breathe better too :-) I have had my share of grief with emulators also. It was not enough that they cost $1,000's and required these monster cables such that sometimes they did not even fit on the target board... They had their own temperament. On the other hand, emulator or not, I had to squeeze my brain a lot more when things did not work. Now, I put a breakpoint or two, and in little time, the problem is usually identified. This is a case where I definitely do not miss the old days. I also agree with you that decent C compilers and sufficient resources on modern chips have made assembly mostly a thing of the past. Except for a very recent project where I had to design a circuit that generates a number of interlaced sync pulses with precise timing. I could have done it with a PLD, but it was simpler to use a Silabs uC, with its built-in stable clock at 25 MHz. Using assembly allowed me to keep timing to within the 40nS cycle time. For what I wanted to do, the compiler generated more code, simply because it was the wrong tool for the task. The Silabs solution was 1 chip, instead of two for the PLD. Since I used another Silabs chip in the project, it also simplified programming (same tool). Didier > -----Original Message----- > From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com > [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Harris > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 9:37 AM > To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement > Subject: Re: [time-nuts] favorite microcontroller module? > > Hi Didier, > .., I can use a pin that ordinarily > >> would run an LED as a diagnostic port. > > > > I had forgotten these tricks, which were the norm 20 years > ago when I > > was too lazy to pull the 6805 emulator. > > It's sort of funny, 20 years ago, I was flush with emulators, > and used them > for most of my development. The had their place back then, > as my projects > were spiraling out of control in terms of complexity. > > Now, I just do PICS, and don't need such things. I can debug > most effectively with either simple diagnostic messages, or a scope. > > I don't miss how code that would work with the emulator > bombed without the emulator ... and vice versa. > > Now that I am used to the full debug > > capability of the Silabs chips, which uses only the reset and one > > other pin on the smaller chips (the other pin being able to share > > debug and normal duty), I don't have to resort to tricks > like this :-) > > You get that capability even with their $18 USB based "development > > system" that's the size of a stick of gum. > > PIC's will do the same thing. I just haven't had the need to yet. > > > > >> Many would say this is a religious issue, but I would disagree. > >> The 6 and 8 pin PICS are simply awesome in what they can do in > >> virtually no space. The tools are cheap, or free. The PIC's are > >> cheap too. > >> > > > > No religion involved, I think the PIC line is unequalled > when it comes > > to the variations and features that are available in the small pin > > count packages. Silabs only has half a handful of chips in DIP > > packages (is two the same as half a handful?) but they have some > > pretty awesome parts in SM packages that are 3x3 mm or so > (they start > > at 11 pins, 10 + a tab), so if you do not do the soldering by hand, > > you can't complain that there is no room for a powerful uC. > > True, they have made a number of wins. > > > I am getting familiar with the AVR line simply because a > number of my > > friends use them and speak highly of the architecture, but > in general, > > I try to stay with open, multi-sourced architectures, so > the 8051 has > > a leg up on PICs and AVRs from the start. I made that decision when > > Motorola forced me out of the 68HC05, like so many others. > I have not > > regretted it. Motorola was not able to get me in the HC08, > even though they gave it a good try. > > I tried to learn the HC10, but I could find no compelling > reason to learn yet another processor. > > > was not going down that road again. Burn me once, shame on > you, burn > > me twice, shame on me (or is it: don't burn me again?) > > > > The Silabs chips start at a couple of $, so they are out of > the sub-$1 > > market for sure. That's fine with me, I don't mind paying > an extra $ > > for the features and convenience :-) > > > > Like many things, uC are tools. The tool that you are the most > > comfortable with is often the best choice, for practical > reasons, even > > more so when you have to make a living out of it. For me, it's > > important to know that when I start a project, I can finish > it within > > schedule and within budget. My familiarity with the 8051 > and many of > > its variants (and my favorite compiler, and the ton and a half of > > available code) gives me that capability, but as you > pointed out, it's > > not the only way. I understand you feel the same about the > PIC. That's perfectly OK. > > > > Now, if you want an evening of fun, buy a Silabs toolstick > and a base > > adapter (about $28 + shipping from Mouser) and you have > everything you > > need (hardware and software, including demo version of the Keil C > > compiler) for a fun uC project. Please note the Keil C51 > compiler can > > be replaced with the free and excellent SDCC compiler. > > I have one around here someplace. I was frustrated because I > couldn't get it > to work under linux and wine. CCS has a native linux > compiler, and their windows > compiler works nicely under wine. I am having some trouble > with Microchip's programmer under the current wine release, > but it has worked in the past, I'll get it working again. > > > > > Here is an example of what you can do in an evening: > > http://www.ko4bb.com/Test_Equipment/AFSignalGenerator/SigGen.html > > Your server seems to be down right now. > > -Chuck Harris > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, > go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.9 - Release Date: > 2/20/2008 12:00 AM > > No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.9 - Release Date: 2/20/2008 12:00 AM

Luis Cupido

Fri, Feb 22, 2008 10:54 AM

Hi,

2 cents ;-)

My stuff uses 51's or PC architectures
and my tiny stuff uses PIC...

So sticking to the subject under discussion
I would say my favorite uCont. is
a 51&derivate and for the small stuff small PICs

I know that someone may reply that nowadays
PIC are bigger and better, but I'm yet to
find a guy who is equally happy in both PIC
and 51's(AVR's ARM's etc)worlds saying that for
complex jobs programed in C he likes better
the PIC over the others.

Three things I don't like to see:

Someone fitting a huge
DSP and tcpip and etc into a small PIC
(is it a challenge or idiocy ???)
Someone blinking a led with a ARM
or a black-fin etc.
(just avoiding to learn 2 pic instructions !!!)
Someone doing a tricky job using a
micro-controller to do something that
is a simple logic job, CPLD or whatever.

Luis Cupido.
ct1dmk

P.S.Wishing to be professional hobbyist...
but the boss don't let me :-(
stuck to the first part (second part on weekends).

Hi, 2 cents ;-) My stuff uses 51's or PC architectures and my tiny stuff uses PIC... So sticking to the subject under discussion I would say my favorite uCont. is a 51&derivate and for the small stuff small PICs I know that someone may reply that nowadays PIC are bigger and better, but I'm yet to find a guy who is equally happy in both PIC and 51's(AVR's ARM's etc)worlds saying that for complex jobs programed in C he likes better the PIC over the others. Three things I don't like to see: - Someone fitting a huge DSP and tcpip and etc into a small PIC (is it a challenge or idiocy ???) - Someone blinking a led with a ARM or a black-fin etc. (just avoiding to learn 2 pic instructions !!!) - Someone doing a tricky job using a micro-controller to do something that is a simple logic job, CPLD or whatever. Luis Cupido. ct1dmk P.S.Wishing to be professional hobbyist... but the boss don't let me :-( stuck to the first part (second part on weekends).