MikroElektronica experimenteer board

Since you're already aware of news:nl.hobby.elektronica, here's another tool for you:

I do not speak your language. I am very happy with my easyPIC5 Board and the Pascal Compiler.

John Ferrell W8CCW

Hello,

Ek gebruik MikroElektronica se Pascal program MicroPascal om PIC uP te programeer nou vir al 4 jaar - dit is oulik. Die eenigste probleem is dat MicroPascal gebruik te veel 'overhead' - as jy wil meer lyne van code kry dan die beste is stil Assembley met MPLAB.

I am really against Mikroelektronika and the fact their IDE is not free, unlike Microchip MPLAB IDE.

I would suggest Microchip ICD3, MPLAB IDE, and QL200 as development board UNLESS that board is not using MPLAB + C18 which I don't know yet. I just stick with manufactuer's own solutions, not Mikroelectronika and their Basic or Pascal language.

Are you SERIOUS? Basic is a TOY language. It's only good for non-critical and small projects, and VisualBasic is only good for creating GUI and simple scripts/automation. Anything complicated written in Basic is prone to bugs and failures, it's unfit for industrial applications.

On the contrary, C language is used to create OTHER languages and whole operating systems and is a de-facto standard for critical apps. It's clear why you and some others choose Mikroelektronika dev board and their lame Basic compiler/interpreter - simplicity.

OK if simplicity is the goal and you're not a professional engineer, go with it.

But if you want to be a professional - drop Basic for embedded design today. Start learning C language.

Get off your throne: "C is better" must have the proper qualifiers.

I used C on PDP 11/70 (UNIX), OS/9 (multi-user on a 1MHz 6809), and

In the days of Turbo Basic and Turbo C on the PC, the compiler engine was the same, the only difference was the front end. If there are equivalent quality compilers for both languages on a given platform, BASIC usually beats C in development speed - no need to write a "middle of the string" function because the assembly version is already in the BASIC compiler.

John

retired AT&T / Bell Labs "skunk works" programmer

C sucks.

All of the complexity of Assembly - with none of the benefits.

no need to write a middle-of-sting function in c. use strlcpy or one of the *printf variants as apropriate.

it's easier than writing qsort in basic :)

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: snipped-for-privacy@netfront.net ---

mike

-- __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / / / /\ \/ /'Think tanks cleaned cheap' /\ \/ / /_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/

Densa International© For the OTHER two percent.

Due to the insane amount of spam and garbage, I block all postings with a Gmail, Google Mail, Google Groups or Hotmail address. I also filter everything from a .cn server.

For solutions which may work for you, please check:

Real men program in Assembly, "You don't need no stinking High Level Language"

;-)

hamilton

it. But if you want to be a professional -drop Basic

Ah, but they drink from Fifths. LMAO!!!!!

Bill

But this is what drove them to it....

BinaryExpr(ExprT1 e1, ExprT2 e2,BinOp op=BinOp()) : _expr1(e1),_expr2(e2),_op(op) {} double eval() const { return _op(_expr1.eval(),_expr2.eval()); }

mike

-- __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / / / /\ \/ /'Think tanks cleaned cheap' /\ \/ / /_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/

Densa International© For the OTHER two percent.

Due to the insane amount of spam and garbage, I block all postings with a Gmail, Google Mail, Google Groups or Hotmail address. I also filter everything from a .cn server.

For solutions which may work for you, please check:

_expr1(e1),_expr2(e2),_op(op) {} double eval() const { return

AHHHHHHHH!!!, what the heck is that? |:^O

BTW, I started to learn C once, for the Apple II, and I quit that really quickly. Anything that can do in 100 lines, I can do in Assembly in 25 lines.

Bill

_expr1(e1),_expr2(e2),_op(op) {} double eval() const { return

I'm a rank beginner with only a bit of programming behind me. I can do a bit of Pascal and did a bit of elementary Fortran back in '84.

My present association with C wasn't really my choice. I picked up an Arduino board a few weeks ago and the user interface is a version of C. There are enough examples in the open software kit that I can cut and paste together enough code to do a solar tracker or heating setup.

From what little I've seen of it and my own limited experience, I'm very tempted to say that C is a dog's breakfast. I may well be wrong, but at this stage I still use a long stick to poke at it.

I also started with small computers (Commodore Vic 20 and C64) outfitted with a Forth cartridge. I wanted to drive a little homemade plotter.

It was a disaster. Not the coding so much, but the mechanics of the machine. I used 1/4 inch threaded rod for the X and Y axis movements. They were driven by four wire stepper motors.

Up until that time I didn't have a real appreciation for the term 'resonance'.

At full tilt, I swear I could see the rods forming portions of a sine wave. Noisy too.

mike

Some of us just flip switches in octal.

mike

Not sick, just enjoy number systms a little too much.

CLVII CLIII

mike

If you limit yourself to a single programming language you become a "One Trick Pony"! Until you grasp the basics of each you cannot appreciate their respective values. My personal favorite is Pascal. I like to use Procedures as well as functions.

OTH, "c" as defined by K&R will accomplish the same goals with fewer instructions for the programmer to remember. It does the heavy lifting through the many libraries. Its limitations are intentional: Many of the features in Pascal are inclined to generate big, slow code.

Basic started small and simple but has grown into a mature language that is popular and efficient.

All three have instruction sets that permit and encourage manipulation at the bit/byte level. That is important to me.

Today's really big curse is the IDE that comes with most packages. They all seem different and have their own quirks. Learning the language has become secondary to learning the "current environment'. Programming for a Windows environment is different than programming for a Linux or an embedded environment.

Higher level languages have more limitations but in general take less manpower to get a given job done, IF that given job is a good fit to that language.

If you are making your living as a programmer or developer the market or your employer will make the decision for you so what is best is not your decision!

Whatever you prefer, it hampers your personal development to become a "one trick pony". John Ferrell W8CCW