Most "active" coroutine library project?
invalid at invalid.invalid
Wed Sep 30 04:16:45 CEST 2009
On 2009-09-29, Hendrik van Rooyen <hendrik at microcorp.co.za> wrote:
> On Monday, 28 September 2009 16:44:48 Grant Edwards wrote:
>> $10 is pretty expensive for a lot of applications. I bet that
>> processor also uses a lot of power and takes up a lot of board
>> space. If you've only got $2-$3 in the money budget, 200uA at
>> 1.8V in the power budget, and 6mm X 6mm of board-space, your
>> choices are limited.
>> Besides If you can get by with 256 or 512 bytes of RAM, why pay
>> 4X the price for a 1K part?
>> Besides which, the 8032 instruction set and development tools
>> are icky compared to something like an MSP430 or an AVR. ;)
>> [The 8032 is still head and shoulders above the 8-bit PIC
> I am biased.
> I like the 8031 family.
> I have written pre-emptive multitasking systems for it,
> as well as state-machine round robin systems.
> In assembler.
> Who needs tools if you have a half decent macro assembler?
Assembler macros are indeed a lost art. Back in the day, I
remember seeing some pretty impressive macro libraries layered
2-3 deep. I've done assember macros as recently as about 2-3
years go because it was the easiest way to auto-magically
generate lookup tables for use by C programs (macro assemblers
always have a "repeat" directive, and cpp doesn't).
> The 803x bit handling is, in my arrogant opinion, still the
> best of any processor. - jump if bit set then clear as an
> atomic instruction rocks.
The bit-addressing mode was (and still is) cool. However, the
stack implementation hurts pretty badly now that memory is
I shouldn't criticize the 8051. I remember switching from the
8048 to the 8051 (8751 actually, at about $300 each) and
thinking it was wonderful. [Anybody who remembers fighting
with the 8048 page boundaries knows what I mean.]
> Where do you get such nice projects to work on?
Just lucky. :)
More information about the Python-list