3v0 said:Could be the project is stale because it does not offer anything new.
In the early 80's Zilog came out with a Z8 that had a BASIC interpreter in ROM. Small SBCs using this were common. There days there is the PICAXE.
You can also take the bootloader route. Develop in MPLAB and download via bootloader to PIC16F and PIC18F chips.
3v0 said:Could be the project is stale because it does not offer anything new.
In the early 80's Zilog came out with a Z8 that had a BASIC interpreter in ROM. Small SBCs using this were common. There days there is the PICAXE.
You can also take the bootloader route. Develop in MPLAB and download via bootloader to PIC16F and PIC18F chips.
dipmicro said:Looking at PICAXE - it does not bring anything new. Bootloaders have been around for even longer than built-in interpreters. What is the big deal about PICAXE really, am I missing something ?
Sceadwian said:Maybe it'll supercede the basic stamp. Massivly over priced under power pic modules.
Sceadwian said:Maybe it'll supercede the basic stamp. Massivly over priced under power pic modules.
upand_at_them said:Not likely. I applaud the PICAXE people for their product, but they can't compete with the STAMP in program space.
I'd like to see an open source version of this. And would be willing to help out. It's not rocket science to write an interpreter that executes code from an external EEPROM.
Nigel Goodwin said:yet includes a full BASIC interpreter, which interprets the code from it's internal EEPROM data memory
upand_at_them said:I'd like to see an open source version of this. And would be willing to help out. It's not rocket science to write an interpreter that executes code from an external EEPROM.
upand_at_them said:Not likely. I applaud the PICAXE people for their product, but they can't compete with the STAMP in program space.
I'd like to see an open source version of this. And would be willing to help out. It's not rocket science to write an interpreter that executes code from an external EEPROM.
Mike
blueroomelectronics said:What's wrong with the $99 PICBASIC Compiler? Costs what a couple of BASIC Stamps do, you can program as many PICs as you want in BASIC with more program space and much much fast program speed.
There are several reasons I do not care for the PICputer.But I did not want to preach PICAXE but PICputer. Nobody, nobody is really seeing the value in that model ??? Same as PICAXE just compiler is built-in.
The ICD2 clones (hello INCHWORM) would be useless as debuggers. That alone is enough to "just say no".PicPuter is fully Linux, Macintosh, Windows, Solaris, Amiga, C64, compatible. The only external requirement is a Terminal Program.
3v0 said:The ICD2 clones (hello INCHWORM) would be useless as debuggers. That alone is enough to "just say no".
3v0 said:The entire development system lives on the PIC. That sounds too spartan for my taste. I would like to see MPLAB's editor come up to the level of MS Visual Studio.
A compiler will beat an interpreter everytime, in both program size and execution speed. A compiler will get patched and upgraded as needed and many support true debuggers.dipmicro said:PICBASIC is only a compiler, you still need a programmer (or chip with preloaded bootloader) PICAXE seems to be the whole 9 yards.
The cost is a tricky thing too: If I purchase BASIC compiler for $99 plus programmer for $36 and make 6 projects altogether (one every two months) - I spent approx $22.50 + cost of microcontroller per project. Seems that PICAXE is cheaper
But I did not want to preach PICAXE but PICputer. Nobody, nobody is really seeing the value in that model ??? Same as PICAXE just compiler is built-in.
To get better debugging then the ICD2 you would need to buy a emulator or a logic analyzer. JTAG and similar similar forms of ICD are good enough that they cut into sales of the above mentioned equipment.The debugger tool is only useful if there is no better means to troubleshoot the code. IAP (In Application Programming) - e.g. in PICAXE or PICputer, may be sometimes better tool than ICSP debugger.
You couild be describing forth which has been around for about 25 years. IIRC it was not difficult to implement BASIC in forth.Don't forget that BASIC built into PIC provides practically very flexible serial communication protocol allowing to bootload and execute any arbitrary command (or code), retrieve (PRINT) and change any variable (PI=3.14) and memory location, place breakpoints into the program, change any line of BASIC program and resume (GOTO). I can actually imagine nice Visual Studio plugin connecting to PICputer.
Apples and oranges. SCPI is a set of strings that can be issued in any language and understool by test equipment that follow the standard.PICputer is way more powerful..
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?