Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
Richard Erlacher
09/22/11 11:33
Read: 913 times
Denver, Co

#183853 - well ... that's not exactly what I did ...
Responding to: Erik Malund's previous message
Erik Malund said:
See ... 'C' can make the memory requirement greater

sure, and so friggin what if, say, 100 of what you are making is to be produced, every saved dollar in dev cost offset min $0.50 in hardware cost, using a VERY low factor.
$0.50 covers, for most chips, the difference between two memory sizes.
AND, I have yet to see a project, save blinky, where C will not save more than 1 hour development time.

I have, resorted to assembler for a few modules (NOT projects) to achieve processing speed, never for memory size.

the above excludes Richard who has made his own 'compiler' out of macros.


I don't disagree with your view. I simply don't do what you do, but do something entirely different, both in substance and in style. You're certainly right in that what I'm doing is to generate my own sort of compiler with predefined macros. The fact that I glue them together as I do is a product of experience, just as the fact you use a specific compiler to do your work is a product of your own experience. I certainly don't believe you are doing anything wrong or otherwise misguided.

Once I have macros that function as I need, within a given architecture, I like to save myself the effort of regenerating, reproving, and reintegrating them. Often the reintegration is still necessary, but once proven and timed, they seldom require any serious effort for reuse. I've not found that to be the case with HLL's.

Compilers "have a mind of their own" and that's not even necessarily a bad thing. However, they create issues of their own, and I seldom know in advance what they'll be. When I use my own proven macros, as a compiler is also likely to do, though those are macros written by someone else, I know what they do, and recognize their effects. Once you've used those provided in the compiler library, you're in a similar situation, where I supposed I'd be, too, if I use a given compiler long enough. If I were to do that, however, my clients would be "stuck" with the choice of that same compiler. I don't wish to impose that on anyone. If they already have the compiler in house, that would be a different matter.

My stuff is generally proof of concept for someone else to productize and mass-produce. I don't produce things in 100's, generally, though I am sometimes involved in projects that end up with quantities ranging from 100 per year to 100 per day. Most of my own work is limited to fewer than a dozen units, as they're either one-off's or small quantity for my own reuse.

As I've often said, "Where you sit determines what you see."


List of 76 messages in thread
AT89LP51xD2 ... coming?        Jan Waclawek      08/29/11 02:45      
   Sounds brilliant!      Andy Neil      08/29/11 03:25      
      Was it AVR who made low-quantity available? Or just spin-off      Per Westermark      08/29/11 05:18      
         Probably true      Andy Neil      08/29/11 07:25      
            Hobbyists and students are really important      Per Westermark      08/29/11 07:37      
               Also...      Andy Neil      08/29/11 07:42      
         That wasn't the only thing ...      Richard Erlacher      08/29/11 08:35      
            Assembler      Per Westermark      08/29/11 09:09      
               'LP simulator      Jan Waclawek      08/29/11 10:06      
                  Good      Per Westermark      08/29/11 10:15      
                  No ... I doubt he means that ...      Richard Erlacher      08/29/11 11:14      
               That may have been the case, but ...      Richard Erlacher      08/29/11 11:12      
               While that may be the case ...      Richard Erlacher      09/20/11 09:10      
                  Never used C - planned to but had to settle for half memsize      Per Westermark      09/20/11 09:54      
                     See ... 'C' can make the memory requirement greater      Richard Erlacher      09/20/11 19:56      
                        But it ain't *necessarily* so      Andy Neil      09/21/11 00:13      
                           Yes, that's a valid basis for the choice of 'C'      Richard Erlacher      09/22/11 10:59      
                        Just don't kick in open doors      Per Westermark      09/21/11 02:50      
                           Again, you may be totally correct about that ...      Richard Erlacher      09/22/11 11:14      
                        sure, and so friggin what if ...      Erik Malund      09/21/11 07:53      
                           well ... that's not exactly what I did ...      Richard Erlacher      09/22/11 11:33      
      On chip debug      Robert Revens      09/15/11 01:12      
         Why unlikely?      Per Westermark      09/15/11 01:26      
            That's true.      Robert Revens      09/15/11 02:01      
            Yes, that's what I meant!      Andy Neil      09/15/11 02:28      
         Missed the point!      Andy Neil      09/15/11 02:27      
            Ah, sorry.      Robert Revens      09/15/11 13:53      
   Single Clocker LP Chips From Atmel      Michael Karas      08/29/11 05:55      
   Samples      Andy Neil      08/29/11 07:44      
      Samples      Michael Karas      08/29/11 08:19      
         Samples      Andy Neil      09/02/11 02:47      
            Samples Not...      Michael Karas      09/02/11 05:30      
               they are good at that      Erik Malund      09/02/11 08:38      
               Atmel says...      Andy Neil      09/02/11 16:22      
               Samples Yes!!      Michael Karas      09/14/11 14:33      
                  Nothing here yet      Andy Neil      09/14/11 15:48      
                     you are not in the US      Jan Waclawek      09/15/11 12:07      
                        No excuse!      Andy Neil      09/15/11 12:55      
                        Envelope?      Michael Karas      09/15/11 18:29      
                      ... "coming" ...      Andy Neil      09/20/11 05:08      
                        Yet another missed opportunity.      Andy Neil      10/31/11 12:28      
                           Sorry thought this thread closed ...      Phillip M Gallo      10/31/11 13:11      
                              Now maybe you guys will see why I don't use 'em      Richard Erlacher      11/06/11 12:04      
                              hard to tell, but...      Jan Waclawek      11/07/11 01:45      
                                 They're thrashing about, but ...      Richard Erlacher      11/07/11 07:35      
                                    why the sigh ...        Erik Malund      11/07/11 07:52      
                                       Probably not ... but you never know ...      Richard Erlacher      11/08/11 09:58      
                                    datasheets      Jan Waclawek      11/07/11 15:25      
                                       I'm glad they're there ...      Richard Erlacher      11/08/11 10:00      
                                          Sad, but true.      Andy Neil      11/08/11 15:51      
                                             Too much "designers"      Per Westermark      11/08/11 16:03      
                                                it's that old bugaboo ... appearance over substance ...      Richard Erlacher      11/08/11 19:45      
                                                I'd say      Erik Malund      11/09/11 06:29      
                           "The part will only be available in about 3 weeks"      Andy Neil      11/09/11 14:36      
                              I've heard/read that comment from them before ...      Richard Erlacher      11/09/11 21:01      
                                 Common with delays for new chips        Per Westermark      11/10/11 03:26      
                                    Quite so!      Andy Neil      11/10/11 12:21      
                                    I have to remind the public-at-risk      Richard Erlacher      11/11/11 14:19      
                                       Again      Per Westermark      11/11/11 14:41      
                                          There's a purpose ...      Richard Erlacher      11/11/11 23:34      
                                 I agree with Per !!        Michael Karas      11/10/11 06:15      
                                    Not so, but it probably applies to every one of ATMEL's      Richard Erlacher      11/11/11 14:23      
                           samples      Jan Waclawek      12/07/11 22:43      
                              I tested...      Michael Karas      12/08/11 04:42      
                                 The AT89LP4052 works very well      David Prentice      12/08/11 09:33      
                                    Looks good, so far, eh?      Richard Erlacher      12/08/11 10:02      
                                       A typical op      David Prentice      12/08/11 12:11      
                                          singleclockers      Jan Waclawek      12/08/11 15:48      
                                          impressive      Maarten Brock      12/10/11 03:20      
                                             I will wait and see.      David Prentice      12/10/11 09:40      
                                                Transistors are cheap      Per Westermark      12/10/11 13:06      
                                          I can't find that      Jan Waclawek      12/11/11 09:41      
                                             Sorry. I thought it was unlikely.      David Prentice      12/11/11 10:19      
                                                copy/paste      Jan Waclawek      12/11/11 15:02      
                                 thanks      Jan Waclawek      12/08/11 11:23      
                              Have you received those samples, Andy?      Andy Neil      12/09/11 03:52      

Back to Subject List