Post by thread:[OT]: Sine table

>Ahh, so. "Deterministic timing" is whatever the compiler **gives** you, >whether it gives 10 cycles to code a loop, or 25 - whether a C instruction >gets coded into 1 cycle or 8. Slowly it's coming across. You are slowly getting it, the compiler determines what you get, thats why it is deterministic ;-? (very tongue in cheek) and we are probably getting rather OT before James has a go. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList spam_OUTpiclist-unsubscribe-requestTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu>

Andy wrote: >>Ahh, so. "Deterministic timing" is whatever the compiler **gives** you, >>whether it gives 10 cycles to code a loop, or 25 - whether a C instruction >>gets coded into 1 cycle or 8. Slowly it's coming across. > >You are slowly getting it, the compiler determines what you get, thats why it is >deterministic ;-? (very tongue in cheek) and we are probably getting rather OT >before James has a go. > Maybe there should just be a law against monday mornings. And this is not OT - this is gut-level programming philosophy. If you don't care about the #cycles, PIC has no advantage over using other microcontrollers, like 6805/8051. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList .....piclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu>

----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Ammerman" <RAMMERMANKILLspamPRODIGY.NET> To: <.....PICLISTKILLspam.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2000 2:03 PM Subject: Re: [PIC]: Sine table > At the risk of starting a flame war... > > Real (wo)men code in assembly (or if they are extra tough, binary) :-) Hehe, in the DOS days the cry was "Real programmers type COPY CON >> PROGRAM.EXE" -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList EraseMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspam_OUTTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu>

On Mon, 21 Aug 2000, Dan Michaels wrote: > And this is not OT - this is gut-level programming philosophy. > If you don't care about the #cycles, PIC has no advantage over > using other microcontrollers, like 6805/8051. I have to respectfully disagree on this point. The PIC has many advantages over a lot of other microcontrollers. I *don't* particularly care about the number of cycles in the vast majority of cases, but I still use PICs exclusively now because of a combination of: High functional integration. I recently designed a display system that multiplexes a large number of LEDs *and* provides an analog brightness control, all while managing a serial data stream. One chip, one xtal. No external logic. Low cost, high availability - I have no trouble locating nearly any PIC variant I need at under US$10. There3 are 805x versions with good integration, but they're either hard to find, hard to buy in small quantities, or both. Tool availability - I bought a C compiler for $100 and a programmer for $69, and could have done either one cheaper. I can work in DOS, Win95/8, NT, or Linux. Other than C, every bit of software I require is free. Scalability - I can write code for a 12C508 and re-use this same code on an 'F877 if I need to. There is a range of processors extending from bare-minimum, dirt-cheap 8-pin to some pretty large processors. The instruction set is the same, or so close as to make code migration trivial. I used to play with 8748 and 8051 MPUs a lot. I bought a PIC programmer and 16C711/JW, which sat for two years while I tried to get around to doing something with them. Since I started learning how to use the PIC, I've never once looked back and said, "Gee, this would be a good place to use an 8052 instead". The PIC just has too many other advantages. Dale --- The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not "Eureka!" (I found it!) but "That's funny ..." -- Isaac Asimov -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList piclist-unsubscribe-requestspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu>

----- Original Message ----- From: Andy Howard <KILLspammusicaKILLspamUKONLINE.CO.UK> To: <RemoveMEPICLISTTakeThisOuTMITVMA.MIT.EDU> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2000 11:51 AM Subject: Re: [OT]: Sine table {Quote hidden}> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bob Ammerman" <spamBeGoneRAMMERMANspamBeGonePRODIGY.NET> > To: <TakeThisOuTPICLISTEraseMEspam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU> > Sent: Monday, August 21, 2000 2:03 PM > Subject: Re: [PIC]: Sine table > > > > At the risk of starting a flame war... > > > > Real (wo)men code in assembly (or if they are extra tough, binary) :-) > > Hehe, in the DOS days the cry was "Real programmers type COPY CON >> > PROGRAM.EXE" > Been there: I had an embedded DOS system with no removable media but it did have a CON. I had to extract the contents of a binary file. Wrote machine language routine to send bytes to serial port. Used only instructions that could be expressed as printable ascii. Entered with "COPY CON PROGRAM.EXE" Worked like a charm. Bob Ammerman RAm Systems (contract development of high performance, high function, low-level software) > http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList > RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList piclist-unsubscribe-requestEraseME.....mitvma.mit.edu>