PBP hardware oriented?


Closed Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    mpavlica's Avatar
    mpavlica Guest

    Red face PBP hardware oriented?

    Hello!
    Ive seen & used BASCOM AVR and i saw that BASCOM does not emulate I2C, SPI, USART etc stuffs - if device support it, then it use it hardware possibilities.
    Is there any chances, that PBP can "see" which MCU is used and then to use hardware stuffs instead emulating it or programmer to wrap arround all those registers??
    Like, if i use I2CWRITE command, if 16F84 is used, then it need to be emulated. But if i use 16F876, then i just need to connect it to right SDA/SCL lines, and I2C oriented commands will use hardware capable USART, not emulating it.
    Am i in right or i am missing something?
    Sorry for my english!
    Milan Pavlica
    YU7XW

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    NW France
    Posts
    3,614


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Angry

    And did you see PBP manual ???

    May be it's time to read it ...

    Alain

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    montreal, canada
    Posts
    6,898


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    As now there's no PBP statement to use the internal MSSP module as HSERIN or HPWM do.
    Steve

    It's not a bug, it's a random feature.
    There's no problem, only learning opportunities.

  4. #4
    mpavlica's Avatar
    mpavlica Guest


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Acetronics
    And did you see PBP manual ???

    May be it's time to read it ...

    Alain
    I DID!!!!!!!
    AND?
    Also, what about IDE and simulator? BASCOM even have LCD in simulator etc etc etc
    Is there any chances to develop new IDE or to advance MicroCodestudio? More oriented to hardware simulation!?!?!
    When i take a look on PIC and AVR family, i want to use PIC with PBP, but sometimes i feel "inferior" when i see what BASCOM can do and PBP cannot! (but it could be capable)!!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    montreal, canada
    Posts
    6,898


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    IMHO simulation tools are just toys. not much. I really prefer to have all my parts on a board to see the real operation in a real environement.

    But if you feel better to use something that gives you those toys, PBP is not the one you need. As i know/suspect PROTON gives those toys.
    Steve

    It's not a bug, it's a random feature.
    There's no problem, only learning opportunities.

  6. #6
    mytekcontrols's Avatar
    mytekcontrols Guest


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Question I read it to...

    Originally Posted by Acetronics
    And did you see PBP manual ???

    May be it's time to read it ...

    Alain
    I have one of the latest manuals which I ordered with my last upgrade, and I can't find any command or reference that states usage with the I2C or SPI hardware. Alain can you please respond and tell us what you are talking about?

    I too would love to see full support of any hardware peripheral functions by PBP.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    montreal, canada
    Posts
    6,898


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    Posted many times on many thread... At this time PBP don't handle the MSSP module. if you want it now, you build it. well as now. I also hope that one day that option will be considered by Melabs. Not because SHIFTIN/SHIFTOUT/I2CREAD/I2CWRITE and others don't work properly... just because they don't use the internal ressources and the possible max speed.
    Steve

    It's not a bug, it's a random feature.
    There's no problem, only learning opportunities.

  8. #8
    mytekcontrols's Avatar
    mytekcontrols Guest


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    My main reason for wanting it has to do with easing the load on the program, and giving you a somewhat multi-tasking aspect. If I recall correctly there are built-in data buffers associatted with the hardware I2C. So it would seem that you could just load the buffer with a PBP command and then take off and do something else while the buffer is sent. Of course the buffer is very short, but still it seems like their would be advantages to the person that uses PBP because they don't like, or know how to program in assembly.

    Even better still would be if a future version of PBP would give the option of implementing recieve buffers for the serial and I2C routines. Something that would be able to operate in the background as an interrupt, and set a flag that could be occasionally polled by the PBP code.

    I luckly do know how to write assembly interrupts, so for me there are other ways to skin the cat (opps! I would NEVER do such a thing, and my cat still has all of his fur), but for some folks it is still beyond there comfort level, and is probably the reason they bought a Basic Compiler in the first place.
    Last edited by mytekcontrols; - 15th June 2005 at 14:59.

Similar Threads

  1. PBP Book
    By Bruce in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: - 4th October 2021, 12:55
  2. Hardware Interrupts and PBP
    By manumenzella in forum mel PIC BASIC Pro
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: - 18th January 2007, 08:16
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: - 23rd December 2006, 10:38
  4. Compiler differences between PBP 2.33 & 2.46
    By nikopolis in forum mel PIC BASIC Pro
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: - 2nd May 2006, 19:01
  5. PBP / XP Crash
    By pondindustrial in forum mel PIC BASIC Pro
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: - 27th November 2005, 03:16

Members who have read this thread : 1

You do not have permission to view the list of names.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts