Searching \ for 'Assembler Verses Pbasic' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/language/index.htm?key=basic
Search entire site for: 'Assembler Verses Pbasic'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'Assembler Verses Pbasic'
1999\10\18@015752 by Mathew Cohen

flavicon
face
part 0 16 bytes
</x-html>

1999\10\18@065008 by Russell McMahon

picon face
Matthew


1.    PBASIC is easier to earn and MUCH faster to get simple things going
in.
Assembler is much more compact and MUCH faster.
PBASIC doesn't handle interrupts as well depending on version.
BASIC tends to look after many of the more horrible aspects of the PIC
architecture and instruction set.

Once you get competent at assembler you will find it more powerful but also
slower to implement than BASIC but BASIC gets increasingly hard to use as
the task gets harder. In particular, for very time sensitive tasks or those
where constancy of time execution in a loop with several paths is needed
BASIC is not really good enough. Even C has this problem at extreme levels
of complexity.

If something is possible at all it's possible in assembler, but sometimes
you'll regret it :-)



Also look at

> I've posted a basic (sorry) html page showing the new compiler if
> anyones interested.
>
> http://www.picnpoke.com/demo/basic.html
>
> Demo software is downloadable from the main page.


AND

Don's Download Dungeon:   http://www.dontronics.com/download.html

and the rest of his site - he has a number of PIC basics and simiolar - some
are free, some not.

2.    Note: Try not to use HTML for list posts - some people can't handle
it. It tends to annoy them and you may miss a useful  answer.





     Russell McMahon
_____________________________

>From another world - http://www.easttimor.com

What can one man* do?
Help the hungry at no cost to yourself!
at  http://www.thehungersite.com/

(* - or woman, child or internet enabled intelligent entity :-))


   Q.Is there an advantage in writing program code in assembler or is the
complied PBasic code just as good.

   I am currently learning pics and assembly.Should I just be learning
PBasic ?????

   Is there a free or low cost product similar to PBasic that I can use???

   If some one has one and can email it to me I would be very grateful.
Hopefully there is docs with is or available on the net.

1999\10\18@162558 by Don McKenzie

flavicon
face
> Mathew Cohen wrote:

> Is there a free or low cost product similar to PBasic that I can
> use???
> If some one has one and can email it to me I would be very grateful.
> Hopefully there is docs with is or available on the net.

lots of free and expensive at:
http://www.dontronics.com/piclinks.html#bi

Don McKenzie  spam_OUTdonTakeThisOuTspamdontronics.com http://www.dontronics.com

Don's Download Dungeon:   http://www.dontronics.com/download.html
Australian Electronics Ring http://www.dontronics.com/aering.html
Win $500USD Cash. Micro design contest:  http://www.simmstick.com

1999\10\18@220617 by Agnes en Henk Tobbe

flavicon
face
part 0 2388 bytes
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>

</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Not as a professional but as a radio - amateur I
have done programming to interface radio's with other equipment ever since the
early 80's. I have used assembler (6502 , 80x86 and recently PIC) BASIC,
T-Pascal, C. Only recently - after a 8 year break - I took up programming again,
this time in PIC-assembler.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2></FONT><FONT size=2>In my opinion it really
depends on what you want:&nbsp; fast, direct and time critical interaction&nbsp;
between electronics and processor? Then assembler does the job. With this you
have a hands on feeling. You control every bit and cycle by cycle you can
predict what is going to happen. It needs&nbsp; an in depths analysis of the
process and a very logic mind. When used well it results in the best, fastest
and most compact code.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>All higher languages (BASIC, PASCAL e.a.) make life simpler.
Especially when you want to process data or make complex calculations. Then a
higher language comes in handy. Time critical routines are difficult to make
while the one BASIC statement results (not all the time but usually) in multiple
machine code instructions.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>So it is not OR but AND. When you want to make the most of the
PIC (or anyother micro)&nbsp; you cannot do without a good workig knowledge of
its assembler. and of assembler techniques in general.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Good luck</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
   <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
   <DIV><FONT size=2>Q.Is there an advantage in writing program code in
   assembler or is the complied PBasic code just as good.</FONT></DIV>
   <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
   <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

</x-html>

1999\10\19@043747 by Dr. Imre Bartfai

flavicon
face
Hi,

I must stress a fact which make the life simpler (especially for me):

administration and complex arithmetic are done in BASIC by me. However,
if I need some time-critical or very hardware-dependent (e. g. reading
iButton or dealing with my own bus architecture), I can use assembly
routines which can be embedded in-line into the Basic program. The both
world are connected seamless: Assembly routines can be CALLed, and they
can share variables (take care that shared variables are allocated in
known banks!). Such way, I couple the human efficiency of Basic with
machine efficiency of Assembler.

Here is my $0.02.

Imre


On Tue, 19 Oct 1999, Agnes en Henk Tobbe wrote:

> Not as a professional but as a radio - amateur I have done programming to inte
rface radio's with other equipment ever since the early 80's. I have used assemb
ler (6502 , 80x86 and recently PIC) BASIC, T-Pascal, C. Only recently - after a
8 year break - I took up programming again, this time in PIC-assembler.
> In my opinion it really depends on what you want:  fast, direct and time criti
cal interaction  between electronics and processor? Then assembler does the job.
With this you have a hands on feeling. You control every bit and cycle by cycle
you can predict what is going to happen. It needs  an in depths analysis of the
process and a very logic mind. When used well it results in the best, fastest a
nd most compact code.
> All higher languages (BASIC, PASCAL e.a.) make life simpler. Especially when y
ou want to process data or make complex calculations. Then a higher language com
es in handy. Time critical routines are difficult to make while the one BASIC st
atement results (not all the time but usually) in multiple machine code instruct
ions.
> So it is not OR but AND. When you want to make the most of the PIC (or anyothe
r micro)  you cannot do without a good workig knowledge of its assembler. and of
assembler techniques in general.
> Good luck
>
>     Q.Is there an advantage in writing program code in assembler or is the com
plied PBasic code just as good.
>
>
>

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1999 , 2000 only
- Today
- New search...