Searching \ for 'MPLAB-ICD firmware version 2.04 and other problems' 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/microchip/devprogs.htm?key=icd
Search entire site for: 'MPLAB-ICD firmware version 2.04 and other problems'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'MPLAB-ICD firmware version 2.04 and other problems'
2000\03\21@000618 by Joe Dowlen

flavicon
face
I also tried to program an 16f866 with no success, now for my real problem!

I have a program that works without failure when using the ICE. But, when I
install the programmed chip in the target system, it will not run.  Do I
have to recompile and remove the nop at the start, or what.  It just won;t
run by itself?!?

Joe
{Original Message removed}

2000\03\21@071439 by briang

flavicon
face
In-Reply-To: <000401bf92f1$72873360$spam_OUTb8b583d1TakeThisOuTspamnomadics.com>

Joe Dowlen <.....jdowlenKILLspamspam@spam@NOMADICS.COM> said:
> I have a program that works without failure when using the ICE. But, when I
> install the programmed chip in the target system, it will not run.  Do I
> have to recompile and remove the nop at the start, or what.  It just won;t
> run by itself?!?

If you are programming the chip with the MPLAB-ICD make sure you program it with
"Enable Debug Mode" switched off when you want it to run on it's own without the
ICD connected.

You can leave the NOP in at address zero if you wish.

If you are trying to run with the watchdog enabled try first with it disabled
and see if that works.

Send another message if you're still having problems.

Brian Gregory.
briangspamKILLspamcix.co.uk

2000\03\21@102245 by jamesnewton

face picon face
Hee, hee, hee, hee, hee....

Sorry, I'm not laughing at you, I'm just hyped for another round of argument
with Tech-tools about ICD vs ICE.

I believe the ICD supports the '866, and would recommend buying or making
one so that you can watch the production chip (rather than the ICE bondout)
run in place (rather than from the ICE pod) in the circuit.

Gee, if I had a buck for every time somebody fell into this trap...

Now, I must say, ICE isn't all bad, and it is much better than anything else
if you can't get ICD support.

---
James Newton .....jamesnewtonKILLspamspam.....geocities.com 1-619-652-0593
http://techref.massmind.org NEW! FINALLY A REAL NAME!
Members can add private/public comments/pages ($0 TANSTAAFL web hosting)


{Original Message removed}

2000\03\21@120627 by Andrew Kunz

flavicon
face
James,

I have some questions about the ICD, since I don't own one perhaps you can
answer some questions:

    1) Does the ICD have break-on-data-change (read, or write, or either)?  I
need it for 2 registers.

    2) Does it have break-on-wdt-timeout (vs reset on t/o)?

    3) Does it have stack dump capability?

    4) Does it have break-on-stack-under/overflow?

    5) Does it support 12 levels of stack vs. the normal 8?

    6) Does it support 25MHz operation?

    7) Does it allow me to program the oscillator to any value I want so that I
can determine exactly what crystal I need to hit the performance exactly,
without having to resort to having a collection of crystals to solder on (SMT
crystals/resonators).  (This is just ONE reason why I hated the Advanced
Transdata ICE, btw).

    8) Does it allow me to set a breakpoint on the fly?  I mean, while it's
running can I just hit a "BREAK" button and regain control of the device?

    9) Does it give me full access to all the pins on the device?

    10)  Does it give me full access to all RAM and ROM in the device?

These are all features I use regularly on my Tech-Tools Mathias.

I'm about to start another 876-based project (using an SMT device) and if your
ICD can do all the above, it would really be something useful.

Thanks!

Andy

2000\03\21@121449 by Don Hyde

flavicon
face
ICD is quite limited in many ways such as only one breakpoint at a time.
But it does provide a real in-circuit full-speed debugging capability for
only $150 list, which is a helluva lot of bang for the buck.  If you need
more, then you can get it but it costs more money.

> {Original Message removed}

2000\03\21@122316 by Alan Pearce

face picon face
>     7) Does it allow me to program the oscillator to any value I want so that
I
>can determine exactly what crystal I need to hit the performance exactly,
>without having to resort to having a collection of crystals to solder on (SMT
>crystals/resonators).  (This is just ONE reason why I hated the Advanced
>Transdata ICE, btw).

The only way you will be able to do this is have an external programmable
oscillator to drive the PIC. I suggest you will have to stick with changing
crystals.

apart from that, you dont really want much for nothing, do you?

2000\03\21@124811 by jamesnewton

face picon face
<VBG> I've tickled somebody's "how much did I pay for this and he thinks its
worthless" bone...

Andy, you know I love you and your sharp wit, and yes, the ICE is a kick
butt tool with all these whiz bang features, and I'll not even argue any of
your points ('cause you got me on all of them, I think) and I would love to
have one (Hint to Tech Tools: I'm possibly for sale <GRIN>) but it still
isn't something that you can drop into every production device you ship.

With an ICD, if a customer returns a board to me, I can connect to the jack
and watch the chip run to see what went wrong. I don't have to desolder a
smt part in plug in the ICE and hope it still exhibits the same problem.
Even if I had an ICE I would have an ICD as well. I'd use the ICD until I
needed to see something it made it hard to see, and then switch to the ICE.

And I will always see what the current production device is seeing, not what
the device (no matter how identical) on the ICE pod is seeing. The cable
from target to pod or pin length differences won't change the signals.

I can live with out (use debugging techniques I've learned over the years to
replace) all the fancy "stop and tell me if it does this" stuff, but I want
to know what is actually happening in the production part, and I can't live
without that.

BTY, the SXKey
http://www.parallaxinc.com/sx/sx.htm
that I do most of my work on DOES do 2, 6 (50Mhz in fact), 7, 8, and 10 for
the Scenix SX devices I use most of the time
http://www.scenix.com
and I understand that the Advanced Transdata version supports 1, 4 and 5 as
well.

---
James Newton EraseMEjamesnewtonspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTgeocities.com 1-619-652-0593
http://techref.massmind.org NEW! FINALLY A REAL NAME!
Members can add private/public comments/pages ($0 TANSTAAFL web hosting)


{Original Message removed}

2000\03\21@125402 by Bill Pierce

picon face
<x-flowed>I'm using the Parallax ICD for Scenix SX (SX-Key) and it has a programmable
clock. It can be set between 4kHz and 100MHz. It provides a PIC emulation
mode which causes instructions to execute in 4 clocks instead of one (SX
mode is called Turbo). I don't know if the emulation it provides for PICs is
good enough for you but I'm pretty happy with it. I'm still pretty new at
this so if anyone else has more information about moving debugged code from
SX to PIC it would be appreciated.

Bill

{Quote hidden}

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

</x-flowed>

2000\03\21@131058 by Andrew Kunz

flavicon
face
The Mathias has a PLL in it, which allows me to pick the osc frequency I want
(pretty closely, too).  Saves me from having to change crystals.

It also allows me to power my target circuit w/o having to make some sort of
power supply for it (many times, depends on how much load it is).

My point was that, as much as James likes his ICD, it still is no replacement
for an ICE.  Nice tool to have, but I sure couldn't afford to be restricted to
just the ICD's very limited functionality.

If you are in the market for a test tool, just make sure you ask all the
questions before you plunk down your hard-earned cash.

Andy










Alan Pearce <RemoveMEA.B.PearceTakeThisOuTspamRL.AC.UK> on 03/21/2000 12:20:44 PM

Please respond to pic microcontroller discussion list <spamBeGonePICLISTspamBeGonespamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>








To:      TakeThisOuTPICLISTEraseMEspamspam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU

cc:      (bcc: Andrew Kunz/TDI_NOTES)



Subject: Re: MPLAB-ICD firmware version 2.04 and other
         problems








>     7) Does it allow me to program the oscillator to any value I want so that
I
>can determine exactly what crystal I need to hit the performance exactly,
>without having to resort to having a collection of crystals to solder on (SMT
>crystals/resonators).  (This is just ONE reason why I hated the Advanced
>Transdata ICE, btw).

The only way you will be able to do this is have an external programmable
oscillator to drive the PIC. I suggest you will have to stick with changing
crystals.

apart from that, you dont really want much for nothing, do you?

2000\03\21@132519 by Scott Dattalo

face
flavicon
face
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000, James Newton wrote:

> <VBG> I've tickled somebody's "how much did I pay for this and he thinks its
> worthless" bone...
>
> Andy, you know I love you and your sharp wit, and yes, the ICE is a kick
> butt tool with all these whiz bang features, and I'll not even argue any of
> your points ('cause you got me on all of them, I think) and I would love to
> have one (Hint to Tech Tools: I'm possibly for sale <GRIN>) but it still
> isn't something that you can drop into every production device you ship.

Hey Andy,

gpsim can do all this stuff.

Also, I'm sure that trace dumps are useful too. Or how about break on read or
writes for specific values?  Or break when invalid ram is accessed? Or break
after certain amount of execution time? Or how about having the ability to
customize any kind of break condition that you need?

</GRIN>
</VBG>

Scott

2000\03\21@140225 by Andrew Kunz

flavicon
face
The ICE supports break-on-specific and trace history.  You're right, I should
have mentioned them too, as I use them a both a lot.

How is RAM "invalid" in a PIC?  They don't offer hardware-level protection.

The only problem with GPSIM is that it doesn't interface with the hardware too
well <G>

The other features would be neat (and possible) additions to the ICE I think.

Andy









Scott Dattalo <RemoveMEscottspamTakeThisOuTDATTALO.COM> on 03/21/2000 01:20:37 PM

Please respond to pic microcontroller discussion list <PICLISTEraseMEspam.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU>








To:      EraseMEPICLISTspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU

cc:      (bcc: Andrew Kunz/TDI_NOTES)



Subject: Re: MPLAB-ICD firmware version 2.04 and other
         problems








On Tue, 21 Mar 2000, James Newton wrote:

> <VBG> I've tickled somebody's "how much did I pay for this and he thinks its
> worthless" bone...
>
> Andy, you know I love you and your sharp wit, and yes, the ICE is a kick
> butt tool with all these whiz bang features, and I'll not even argue any of
> your points ('cause you got me on all of them, I think) and I would love to
> have one (Hint to Tech Tools: I'm possibly for sale <GRIN>) but it still
> isn't something that you can drop into every production device you ship.

Hey Andy,

gpsim can do all this stuff.

Also, I'm sure that trace dumps are useful too. Or how about break on read or
writes for specific values?  Or break when invalid ram is accessed? Or break
after certain amount of execution time? Or how about having the ability to
customize any kind of break condition that you need?

</GRIN>
</VBG>

Scott

2000\03\21@162820 by briang

flavicon
face
In-Reply-To: <RemoveME852568A9.005DBEDA.00EraseMEspamEraseMEtransdev.com>

The PIC chips the ICD does only go up to 8K words of program memory.

Programs that small generally don't present hard debugging problems to
anyone with minimal programming skills.

Brian Gregory.
RemoveMEbriangspam_OUTspamKILLspamcix.co.uk

2000\03\21@164026 by l.allen

picon face
>
> The PIC chips the ICD does only go up to 8K words of program memory.
>
> Programs that small generally don't present hard debugging problems to
> anyone with minimal programming skills.
>
It must be just me then that spends hours tracking down
obscure programme bugs. Bugger... I didnt need that ICE
after all. Those 2 thousand line programmes should be
whipped up before morning tea.

Oh dear... sarcasm is the lowest form of wit... but this
pressed my button.


_____________________________

Lance Allen
Technical Officer
Uni of Auckland
Psych Dept
New Zealand

http://www.psych.auckland.ac.nz

_____________________________

2000\03\21@165035 by David VanHorn

flavicon
face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

At 09:39 AM 3/22/00 +1200, Lance Allen wrote:
>
> The PIC chips the ICD does only go up to 8K words of program memory.
>
> Programs that small generally don't present hard debugging problems to
> anyone with minimal programming skills.

What planet does this happen on?

8k of assembler is a LOT of code.  I used to work on a system that had an
8K bios, including multi-initiator arbitrating SCSI.
That alone was a major project, and yet was only about 2k of the code.

The routine that gives you fits for days can be as small as only a few
instructions, if it's interacting with something outside the CPU.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBONgYU4FlGDz1l6VWEQJUdgCgjaCTpAPwJ9rG451HRULB8/VPZG4AoNtE
tO+aSeBddqrvzI1D5YIoI4w8
=rrgV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2000\03\21@170454 by Andrew Kunz

flavicon
face
We spent several MAN-WEEKS once looking for a bug.

Turned out to be a MOVLW instead of a MOVF

And that was only in a 2K chip.

Andy











David VanHorn <RemoveMEdvanhornTakeThisOuTspamspamCEDAR.NET> on 03/21/2000 07:48:19 PM

Please respond to pic microcontroller discussion list <EraseMEPICLISTspamspamspamBeGoneMITVMA.MIT.EDU>








To:      RemoveMEPICLISTKILLspamspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU

cc:      (bcc: Andrew Kunz/TDI_NOTES)



Subject: Re: MPLAB-ICD firmware version 2.04 and other
         problems[OT]








-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

At 09:39 AM 3/22/00 +1200, Lance Allen wrote:
>
> The PIC chips the ICD does only go up to 8K words of program memory.
>
> Programs that small generally don't present hard debugging problems to
> anyone with minimal programming skills.

What planet does this happen on?

8k of assembler is a LOT of code.  I used to work on a system that had an
8K bios, including multi-initiator arbitrating SCSI.
That alone was a major project, and yet was only about 2k of the code.

The routine that gives you fits for days can be as small as only a few
instructions, if it's interacting with something outside the CPU.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBONgYU4FlGDz1l6VWEQJUdgCgjaCTpAPwJ9rG451HRULB8/VPZG4AoNtE
tO+aSeBddqrvzI1D5YIoI4w8
=rrgV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2000\03\21@171132 by Quitt, Walter

flavicon
face
How about

MOVFP VAR,W
and
MOVFP VAR,WREG

Oh the joy......

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Kunz [akunzSTOPspamspamspam_OUTTDIPOWER.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 2:02 PM
To: spamBeGonePICLISTSTOPspamspamEraseMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: MPLAB-ICD firmware version 2.04 and other problems[OT]


We spent several MAN-WEEKS once looking for a bug.

Turned out to be a MOVLW instead of a MOVF

And that was only in a 2K chip.

Andy











David VanHorn <KILLspamdvanhornspamBeGonespamCEDAR.NET> on 03/21/2000 07:48:19 PM

Please respond to pic microcontroller discussion list
<EraseMEPICLISTspamEraseMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU>








To:      @spam@PICLIST@spam@spamspam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU

cc:      (bcc: Andrew Kunz/TDI_NOTES)



Subject: Re: MPLAB-ICD firmware version 2.04 and other
         problems[OT]








-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

At 09:39 AM 3/22/00 +1200, Lance Allen wrote:
>
> The PIC chips the ICD does only go up to 8K words of program memory.
>
> Programs that small generally don't present hard debugging problems to
> anyone with minimal programming skills.

What planet does this happen on?

8k of assembler is a LOT of code.  I used to work on a system that had an
8K bios, including multi-initiator arbitrating SCSI.
That alone was a major project, and yet was only about 2k of the code.

The routine that gives you fits for days can be as small as only a few
instructions, if it's interacting with something outside the CPU.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBONgYU4FlGDz1l6VWEQJUdgCgjaCTpAPwJ9rG451HRULB8/VPZG4AoNtE
tO+aSeBddqrvzI1D5YIoI4w8
=rrgV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2000\03\21@171332 by Tony Nixon

flavicon
picon face
David VanHorn wrote:
> The routine that gives you fits for days can be as small as only a few
> instructions, if it's interacting with something outside the CPU.

Dead right there.

I've probably got about 1K2 of code total that is spread out across 4
PICs all communicating together, 2 via a radio link. What about a 1K
programmable ignition system. Try debugging these in the real world,

[sigh] the memories :-)

--
Best regards

Tony

http://www.picnpoke.com
spamBeGonesalesspamKILLspampicnpoke.com

2000\03\21@175058 by Bill Pierce

picon face
<x-flowed>My SX-Key lets me pick the osc frequency and the demo board that came with
it includes power for my project. I can also plug into the header I design
into my projects and debug a production part.

Bill

{Quote hidden}

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

</x-flowed>

2000\03\21@181820 by Dan Michaels

flavicon
face
Lance wrote:
>>
>> The PIC chips the ICD does only go up to 8K words of program memory.
>>
>> Programs that small generally don't present hard debugging problems to
>> anyone with minimal programming skills.
>>
>It must be just me then that spends hours tracking down
>obscure programme bugs. Bugger... I didnt need that ICE
>after all. Those 2 thousand line programmes should be
>whipped up before morning tea.
>
>Oh dear... sarcasm is the lowest form of wit... but this
>pressed my button.
>

Well, Lance, the difference is, here in american universities,
they teach terrific structured, top-down, modular programming
technique, using a pseudo-code step translated in final Pascal
code *ONLY* after the pseudo-code is known to be bug-free and
structured perfectly. After which, the Pascal simply falls right
out automatically, almost without looking. Aks any CS100 professor.
[BTW, that's aks, not ask].

Once you learn to do this right, anything else is easy. Shoot,
my last project had 400 total pages (about 20,000 lines) of
source code, including PC code, PIC code, and Scenix code, and
by using those few simple, easily-remembered CS100 techniques,
I just grinned all the way through it. Botta bing.

And who says "sarcasm is the lowest form of wit"? Indeed, it's
the highest form of wit in our american congress.

best regards,
- Dan Michaels
Oricom Technologies
http://www.sni.net/~oricom
==========================

2000\03\21@190151 by Quitt, Walter

flavicon
face
Coming and graduating from the home of P-code and Pascal,
I can tell you the pseudo code stuff has been ditched!
It died right along with the Apple IIs it was written on.

What is taught is data structures, compiler design, linear algebra
and stuff like that.  Programming in the small (PICs) is done in
a single course using emulators.  The rest is lotta theory.
I learned to learn.  That really set me back.  Now with many
years of EXPERIENCE I am finally a valuable engineer.

What is simple and obvious to some ain't to others.
That's is why we work in teams and bang this stuff out.
Without the proper tools you have too much risk and
that's how a project can fail or take too long.

-Walt...:-)

{Original Message removed}

2000\03\22@021119 by w. v. ooijen / f. hanneman

picon face
> Well, Lance, the difference is, here in american universities,
> they teach terrific structured, top-down, modular programming
> technique, using a pseudo-code step translated in final Pascal
> code *ONLY* after the pseudo-code is known to be bug-free and
> structured perfectly. After which, the Pascal simply falls right
> out automatically, almost without looking. Aks any CS100 professor.
> [BTW, that's aks, not ask].

I have been an assistant for such a course (in Holland). Locating the
errors in the final progras was big fun, though I must admit that there
would have been more errors if the pseudo-code step would not have been
first. But I consider such programming 'easy', as opposed to 'interesting'
programming like time-ciritical (isosynchronous) coding, optimized inner
interpreter loops, compiler back-ends etc.

Wouter

2000\03\22@112231 by Dan Michaels

flavicon
face
Walter wrote:

>Coming and graduating from the home of P-code and Pascal,
>I can tell you the pseudo code stuff has been ditched!
>It died right along with the Apple IIs it was written on.
>
>What is taught is data structures, compiler design, linear algebra
>and stuff like that.  Programming in the small (PICs) is done in
>a single course using emulators.  The rest is lotta theory.
>I learned to learn.  That really set me back.  Now with many
>years of EXPERIENCE I am finally a valuable engineer.
>
>What is simple and obvious to some ain't to others.
>That's is why we work in teams and bang this stuff out.
>Without the proper tools you have too much risk and
>that's how a project can fail or take too long.
>
>-Walt...:-)
>

<WITTY OPENING REMARK>
Walter, conjecturing that the Apple II's lights went out about
1984, that means your home university was about 16 years ahead
of its time.
</WITTY OPENING REMARK>

<EXAMPLE CITING PROFOUND UNDERSTANDING>
In my dealings with universities in late 80s and again in
mid-90s, pseudo-code was *so* alive and well, that one prof
was on a campaign to "formalize" his particular dialect. So,
the CS100 students got to learn: (a) programming techniques,
(b) newest wizz-bang "formal" pseudocode language, and finally
(c) Pascal syntax, all at the same time.

Kinda like learning both Greek and Latin in the first course
in kindergarten. First you write a novel in Greek (ie, pseudocode),
and then you translate that into a novella in Latin (ie, Pascal),
and that assumes you took the time to figure out how to write
in the first place, since your perfessor spent most of his time
talking in foreign tonques.
</EXAMPLE CITING PROFOUND UNDERSTANDING>

<PONTIFICATION>
But that stuff about data structures/etc you mention is just
details. The "real" meat is the structured, top-down, stuff.
Learn that, so the theory goes, and you got time for a
capuccino in the afternoon. The rest is gravy.
</PONTIFICATION>

<THE UNKNOWN UNIVERSE>
I've often wondered whether CS perfessors ever actually write
any code themselves, or just think about writing code. If I
knew the answer to this, I might understand the educational
system better.
</THE UNKNOWN UNIVERSE>

<ACTUAL POINT>
But you are entirely correct - "learning to learn" is really
what it's all about. The rest is just what it takes to get a
diploma. Good tools help too. Whatever actually works best
for you is what you want to use.
</ACTUAL POINT>

best regards,
- Dan Michaels
==============

2000\03\22@124156 by Andrew Kunz

flavicon
face
><WITTY OPENING REMARK>
></WITTY OPENING REMARK>
>
><EXAMPLE CITING PROFOUND UNDERSTANDING>
></EXAMPLE CITING PROFOUND UNDERSTANDING>
>
><PONTIFICATION>
></PONTIFICATION>
>
><THE UNKNOWN UNIVERSE>
></THE UNKNOWN UNIVERSE>
>
><ACTUAL POINT>
></ACTUAL POINT>
>

Where is Tjaart's anti-HTML mail campaign when you need it?

Andy

2000\03\22@130435 by Dan Michaels

flavicon
face
At 12:39 PM 3/22/00 -0500, you wrote:
>><WITTY OPENING REMARK>
>></WITTY OPENING REMARK>
>>
>><EXAMPLE CITING PROFOUND UNDERSTANDING>
>></EXAMPLE CITING PROFOUND UNDERSTANDING>
>>
>><PONTIFICATION>
>></PONTIFICATION>
>>
>><THE UNKNOWN UNIVERSE>
>></THE UNKNOWN UNIVERSE>
>>
>><ACTUAL POINT>
>></ACTUAL POINT>
>>
>Where is Tjaart's anti-HTML mail campaign when you need it?
>Andy
>

Sorry that my responses tend to be a little undisciplined.
I will try to work on that.

best regards,
- Dan Michaels
==============

2000\03\22@130746 by mike

flavicon
face
><EXAMPLE CITING PROFOUND UNDERSTANDING>
>In my dealings with universities in late 80s and again in
>mid-90s, pseudo-code was *so* alive and well, that one prof
>was on a campaign to "formalize" his particular dialect. So,
>the CS100 students got to learn: (a) programming techniques,
>(b) newest wizz-bang "formal" pseudocode language, and finally
>(c) Pascal syntax, all at the same time.

><PONTIFICATION>
>But that stuff about data structures/etc you mention is just
>details. The "real" meat is the structured, top-down, stuff.
>Learn that, so the theory goes, and you got time for a
>capuccino in the afternoon. The rest is gravy.
></PONTIFICATION>
..... and of course small microcontrollers are one time where
'bottom-up' can _sometimes_ be the most appropriate approach,
especially when you need to squeeze every last drop of preformance out
of a chip. There are times when you just need to write some small but
critical part of the code to see if something can be done at all, and
then figure out how you can fit the rest of the application around it.
><THE UNKNOWN UNIVERSE>
>I've often wondered whether CS perfessors ever actually write
>any code themselves, or just think about writing code. If I
>knew the answer to this, I might understand the educational
>system better.
></THE UNKNOWN UNIVERSE>
No college course is ever going to teach you how to squeeze that last
byte out of a routine so it fits a smaller chip.... or use spare
hardware register bits when you run out of RAM... or arrange i/o pins
so you can RLF serial data in from them....  or write self-modifying
interrupt code...8-)

><ACTUAL POINT>
>But you are entirely correct - "learning to learn" is really
>what it's all about.
Absolutely.  I don't think I've ever done a project where I haven't
learnt something new & useful, or thought of a trick I could have used
in a previous project.

>The rest is just what it takes to get a
>diploma. Good tools help too.
But the ability to figure out how to manage without can also be pretty
useful too, like when you fry your ICE at 7PM on a Friday night!
>Whatever actually works best
>for you is what you want to use.
></ACTUAL POINT>

2000\03\22@132023 by Quitt, Walter

flavicon
face
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dan Michaels [TakeThisOuToricomspamspamLYNX.SNI.NET]
>Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2000 10:04 AM
>To: PICLISTEraseMEspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: MPLAB-ICD firmware version 2.04 and other problems[OT]
>
[SNIP]
>
>Sorry that my responses tend to be a little undisciplined.
>I will try to work on that.

That sounds like a good sentence for or from a performance review! :-) :-)
:-)

2000\03\22@133657 by Dan Michaels

flavicon
face
At 10:16 AM 3/22/00 -0800, you wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Dan Michaels [RemoveMEoricomEraseMEspamspam_OUTLYNX.SNI.NET]
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2000 10:04 AM
>>To: @spam@PICLISTRemoveMEspamEraseMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU
>>Subject: Re: MPLAB-ICD firmware version 2.04 and other problems[OT]
>>
>[SNIP]
>>
>>Sorry that my responses tend to be a little undisciplined.
>>I will try to work on that.
>
>That sounds like a good sentence for or from a performance review! :-) :-)
>:-)
>

Wally [the real brains of the outfit] used it in a Dilbert
column last week.

- Dan

2000\03\22@140733 by Dan Michaels

flavicon
face
mike@whitewing.co.uk  wrote:
>
>><PONTIFICATION>
>>But that stuff about data structures/etc you mention is just
>>details. The "real" meat is the structured, top-down, stuff.
>>Learn that, so the theory goes, and you got time for a
>>capuccino in the afternoon. The rest is gravy.
>></PONTIFICATION>
>
>..... and of course small microcontrollers are one time where
>'bottom-up' can _sometimes_ be the most appropriate approach,
>especially when you need to squeeze every last drop of preformance out
>of a chip. There are times when you just need to write some small but
>critical part of the code to see if something can be done at all, and
>then figure out how you can fit the rest of the application around it.
>

Where I went to school, any student using the term 'bottom-up' got
an automatic 'F' in CS100.

But, if you want to get serious here [shoot, I thought everyone was
just joking around], I *ALWAYS* code top-down/bottom-up/top-down/etc,
iteratively. Write module/test module/integrate module. That's what
my post-education experience taught me. That, and life.
===============

{Quote hidden}

Agreed. See last answer, 2nd paragraph. [and jeez, "self-modifying
interrupt code" ... - no perfesser I ever knew could do that].
===================

>><ACTUAL POINT>
>>But you are entirely correct - "learning to learn" is really
>>what it's all about.
>
>Absolutely.  I don't think I've ever done a project where I haven't
>learnt something new & useful, or thought of a trick I could have used
>in a previous project.
>

Ditto. [ditto]. [[[ditto]]].
===========

>>The rest is just what it takes to get a
>>diploma. Good tools help too.
>
>But the ability to figure out how to manage without can also be pretty
>useful too, like when you fry your ICE at 7PM on a Friday night!
>

Ahhh, as they say, "you can't always hit every nail using the same
hammer", or something like that.
=================

>>Whatever actually works best
>>for you is what you want to use.
>></ACTUAL POINT>
>

Good, I'm glad you said that.

best regards,
- Dan
================

2000\03\22@142231 by Quitt, Walter

flavicon
face
I think we call it "experience."
Or perhaps learning from experiences.
Or Or Or.........

Though some experiences I keep repeating and
always saying: "I'll never do that again."

Ya, right.....:-) :-)

Also, ever notice that the hammers keep getting bigger?
That can also be said better, perhaps as "bloated."

Back to it...-W

{Original Message removed}

2000\03\22@144930 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
   <THE UNKNOWN UNIVERSE>
   I've often wondered whether CS perfessors ever actually write
   any code themselves, or just think about writing code. If I
   knew the answer to this, I might understand the educational
   system better.
   </THE UNKNOWN UNIVERSE>

I worked several years at Stanford University (ie, full time Systems
Programmer for some of the mainframes they used to use ... all over.  I
also worked part time in a computer center elsewhere while I was in school
myself.)  As far as I could tell, programming "cluefullness" is about as
common in CS grad students and Profs as it is amoung undergrads; some can
program really well, and some can't program their way out of a paper bag,
and the majority are in between.  A PhD in Computer Science is neither
necessary or sufficient to be a good programmer.

Part of the problem is assuming that "programming expertise" is a
one-dimensional timeline.  An expert in computer science is by definition
focussed on "computer science" "problems" like language and compiler
design, networking algorithms, or whatever.  Some of the problems are VERY
HARD, even without having to commit them to actual code.  Taking a compiler
expert and having him try to write a stepper motor controller on a strange
microcontroller just isn't fair.  (In particular, I once tried to audit a
course in Smalltalk.  While it seemed neat in some ways, I was totally
disgusted by the "and it runs on a simple $10k sun3 workstation with only
16M of memory" attitude prevalent in those circles.  Different strokes...)
(Also consider Cornell's microcontroller course that uses Atmel board (and
has a very nice website somewhere.)  It's offered by the EE department, and
taught by someone from the psychology dept (? Maybe biochem - something
like that.)

Programming != Computer Science.

BillW

2000\03\22@151924 by Dan Michaels

flavicon
face
.....
>disgusted by the "and it runs on a simple $10k sun3 workstation with only
>16M of memory" attitude prevalent in those circles.  Different strokes...)
>(Also consider Cornell's microcontroller course that uses Atmel board (and
>has a very nice website somewhere.)  It's offered by the EE department, and
>taught by someone from the psychology dept (? Maybe biochem - something
>like that.)
>
>Programming != Computer Science.
>
>BillW
>

You're right, BillW, at my school, they said "We teach computer science
here, not programming. Go to ___ State U. for that".

[... and so that's what all those psych grad students were doing in
the microprocessor lab. Son of a gun].

- Dan
=====

2000\03\22@154924 by Quitt, Walter

flavicon
face
>-----Original Message-----
>From: William Chops Westfield [EraseMEbillwspam@spam@CISCO.COM]
>Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2000 11:48 AM
>To: @spam@PICLISTspam_OUTspam.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: MPLAB-ICD firmware version 2.04 and other problems[OT]
>
[snip]
>Programming != Computer Science.
>
TURE!

Art != Science

2000\03\23@153721 by l.allen

picon face
> (Also consider Cornell's microcontroller course that uses Atmel board (and
> has a very nice website somewhere.)  It's offered by the EE department, and
> taught by someone from the psychology dept (? Maybe biochem - something
> like that.)
>

What would someone from Psychology know?
They're all head shrinks right!

Being often at the end of technical blinkering, especially
from within our own Uni,  Psych Dept's have some kick
ass research into subjects like neural processing, parallel
processing, genetic algorythms and psycho-acoustics -
ALL the MP3 and Compact CD algorythms for dynamic
compression are from research by Psychologists, our
workshops are some of the biggest on campus, people
come to us from other depts for PIC advice.

Im not getting at anyone, just setting the record straight.

_____________________________

Lance Allen
Technical Officer
Uni of Auckland
Psych Dept
New Zealand

http://www.psych.auckland.ac.nz

_____________________________

2000\03\23@155426 by l.allen

picon face
>
> Well, Lance, the difference is, here in american universities,
> they teach terrific structured, top-down, modular programming
> technique, using a pseudo-code step translated in final Pascal
> code *ONLY* after the pseudo-code is known to be bug-free and
> structured perfectly. After which, the Pascal simply falls right
> out automatically, almost without looking. Aks any CS100 professor.
> [BTW, that's aks, not ask].
>
> Once you learn to do this right, anything else is easy. Shoot,
> my last project had 400 total pages (about 20,000 lines) of
> source code, including PC code, PIC code, and Scenix code, and
> by using those few simple, easily-remembered CS100 techniques,
> I just grinned all the way through it. Botta bing.
>

Well, I guess we dont know nuffing.
ICEs are for morons and eight thousand line programmes
are a piece of piss.
I dont believe a hardware intensive- interactive
environment will play ball they way you insist.


BTW top down structured programming was being taught
in NZ 13 years ago, the inventors of the technique came
down here and established it here then. I have been using
this technique for 8 years now.
New Zealand is not a nation of morons, the worlds first
4GL was invented by NZers.. incase you forgot.

And thanks for the spelling lesson.
_____________________________

Lance Allen
Technical Officer
Uni of Auckland
Psych Dept
New Zealand

http://www.psych.auckland.ac.nz

_____________________________

2000\03\23@222112 by Dan Michaels

flavicon
face
At 08:52 AM 3/24/00 +1200, you wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Hi Lance,

>From your tonque-in-cheek response, I presume you received my
memo in the manner it was intended. When I said I "grinned all
the way through ..." my 20,000 lines of code, I conveniently
forget to mention the 10,000 bugs I had to fix along the way.
Botta bing.

Besides, your buddy what started this said "8K words of
program memory .... don't present hard debugging problems ....",
but I think he got himself confused with a Windows program
written in C.

Just for practice, I went and whipped up a little program called
printf("Hello, World"); today, and lo and behold, it compiled
and ran the very first time. It had no bugs at all, and it
actually consumed over "54K of program space". Hey, that
top-down stuff really does work.

best regards,
- Dan

2000\03\24@015529 by Tony Nixon

flavicon
picon face
Dan Michaels wrote:
> Just for practice, I went and whipped up a little program called
> printf("Hello, World"); today, and lo and behold, it compiled
> and ran the very first time. It had no bugs at all, and it
> actually consumed over "54K of program space". Hey, that
> top-down stuff really does work.

I just did this for Win98 and it took 280K.

--
Best regards

Tony

http://www.picnpoke.com
spamBeGonesalesEraseMEspampicnpoke.com

2000\03\24@110813 by Dan Michaels

flavicon
face
Tony wrote:
>Dan Michaels wrote:
>> Just for practice, I went and whipped up a little program called
>> printf("Hello, World"); today, and lo and behold, it compiled
>> and ran the very first time. It had no bugs at all, and it
>> actually consumed over "54K of program space". Hey, that
>> top-down stuff really does work.
>
>I just did this for Win98 and it took 280K.
>--
>Best regards
>
>Tony
>

I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who can successfully
employ those tried-n-true CS100 techniques to produce large
bug-free software. Ok, Bill Gates, I'm waiting for a job offer.

Thanks for providing support for my feeble case, Tony, and
best regards,

- Dan Michaels
==============
P.S. Can we end this thread now, guys!!

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2000 , 2001 only
- Today
- New search...