New Pico Pi for £3.60
<https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/raspberry-pi-pico>
New Pico Pi for £3.60
<https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/raspberry-pi-pico>
Dana Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:49:58 +0000, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> napis'o:
New Pico Pi for £3.60
<https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/raspberry-pi-pico>
But... it should not be called pi.
People will whink it is like zero... but smaller.
They should've named it something different.
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
New Pico Pi for £3.60
<https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/raspberry-pi-pico>
Hmm, not a real Pi in any sort of way at all, it's a microcontroller
with no OS. It's only a Pi because it's made by the same company.
Dana Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:49:58 +0000, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> napis'o:
New Pico Pi for £3.60
<https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/raspberry-pi-pico>
But... it should not be called pi.
People will whink it is like zero... but smaller.
They should've named it something different.
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
New Pico Pi for £3.60Hmm, not a real Pi in any sort of way at all, it's a microcontroller
<https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/raspberry-pi-pico>
with no OS. It's only a Pi because it's made by the same company.
is slightly cheaper than the equivalent PICAXE I need for my project.
... and it's a great disappointment to me that it's not a 64-bit processor
On 21/01/2021 17:21, Chris Green wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
New Pico Pi for ??3.60
<https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/raspberry-pi-pico>
Hmm, not a real Pi in any sort of way at all, it's a microcontroller
with no OS. It's only a Pi because it's made by the same company.
... and it's a great disappointment to me that it's not a 64-bit processor
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
... and it's a great disappointment to me that it's not a 64-bit processor
Name one.
On 21/01/2021 21:51, A. Dumas wrote:
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:As the Pi4 is a 64 bit processor, one assumed that all future
... and it's a great disappointment to me that it's not a 64-bit
processor
Name one.
developments by that company would be 64 bit.
On 21/01/2021 21:51, A. Dumas wrote:
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
... and it's a great disappointment to me that it's not a 64-bit processor >>Name one.
As the Pi4 is a 64 bit processor, one assumed that all future
developments by that company would be 64 bit.
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 21/01/2021 21:51, A. Dumas wrote:
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
... and it's a great disappointment to me that it's not a 64-bit
processor
Name one.
As the Pi4 is a 64 bit processor, one assumed that all future
developments by that company would be 64 bit.
That's a general purpose CPU for use in general purpose computers
(like the Pi 4). This new thing is a microcontroller chip for use in microcontrollers. There are currently no 64-bit microcontrollers on
the market. I can imagine it one day moving that way, maybe for
portable image recognition stuff? For now, it would be a very, very specialised niche and that's not Raspberry Pi's aim.
Looks like it aims to be an Arduino competitor, so yeah, it's a
computer, but not in the same "runs a desktop" sense as the others in
the "Pi" lineage.
On 22 Jan 2021 06:51:03 GMT
A. Dumas <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> wrote:
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 21/01/2021 21:51, A. Dumas wrote:
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
... and it's a great disappointment to me that it's not a 64-bit
processor
Name one.
As the Pi4 is a 64 bit processor, one assumed that all future
developments by that company would be 64 bit.
That's a general purpose CPU for use in general purpose computers
(like the Pi 4). This new thing is a microcontroller chip for use in
microcontrollers. There are currently no 64-bit microcontrollers on
the market. I can imagine it one day moving that way, maybe for
portable image recognition stuff? For now, it would be a very, very
specialised niche and that's not Raspberry Pi's aim.
Indeed. I've yet to find a need for more than eight bits in a microcontroller, along with a maximum of 2KB of RAM. If I need more
power, it's a RPi.
In my retirement, I have some ideas on language
development, essentially interactive as was BASIC
and FORTH but running at the speed of compiled
code, and the 64 bit ARM instruction set looks
like a good starter.
On 22/01/2021 13:22, gareth evans wrote:
In my retirement, I have some ideas on language
development, essentially interactive as was BASIC
and FORTH but running at the speed of compiled
code, and the 64 bit ARM instruction set looks
like a good starter.
FORTH was good stuff speed wise
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
Looks like it aims to be an Arduino competitor, so yeah, it's a
computer, but not in the same "runs a desktop" sense as the others in
the "Pi" lineage.
I don't really get the market positioning of this.
It is 50 years ago this year that I cut my teeth on a naked
PDP11/20 with no OS and only an assembler. Everything I did
was up to me.
Over the years I have been involved in real-time OS
development and language interpreters to the extent
that in my retirement I've an N-I-H stance towards
others' software.
I'd like to relive my youth but with the 64-bit instruction
set of the ARM but without being imbrangled in all the
bolt-on (Lancashire? :-) ) goodies that the RPi4 has.
I don't have the capability to produce the PCB and
solder down a BGA myself, despite a radio ham's
junk box of nearly 60 years' standing.
In my retirement, I have some ideas on language
development, essentially interactive as was BASIC
and FORTH but running at the speed of compiled
code, and the 64 bit ARM instruction set looks
like a good starter.
On 22/01/2021 09:33, Joe wrote:
On 22 Jan 2021 06:51:03 GMT
A. Dumas <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> wrote:
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 21/01/2021 21:51, A. Dumas wrote:
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
... and it's a great disappointment to me that it's not a 64-bit
processor
Name one.
As the Pi4 is a 64 bit processor, one assumed that all future
developments by that company would be 64 bit.
That's a general purpose CPU for use in general purpose computers
(like the Pi 4). This new thing is a microcontroller chip for use in
microcontrollers. There are currently no 64-bit microcontrollers on
the market. I can imagine it one day moving that way, maybe for
portable image recognition stuff? For now, it would be a very, very
specialised niche and that's not Raspberry Pi's aim.
Indeed. I've yet to find a need for more than eight bits in a microcontroller, along with a maximum of 2KB of RAM. If I need more
power, it's a RPi.
It is 50 years ago this year that I cut my teeth on a naked
PDP11/20 with no OS and only an assembler. Everything I did
was up to me.
Ah, but the normal process would be to enter the boot loader by hand,
It is 50 years ago this year that I cut my teeth on a naked
PDP11/20 with no OS and only an assembler. Everything I did
was up to me.
then a bigger/better loader from paper tape and then the actual OS.
Or did you actually write naked assembler code to do things direct
with the hardware?
I started at a similar time (early 1970s) on a wierd device called the
PDP-12 (an odd marriage of a PDP-8 and a university developed machine
called a Linc-12).
On 22/01/2021 13:34, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/01/2021 13:22, gareth evans wrote:
In my retirement, I have some ideas on language
development, essentially interactive as was BASIC
and FORTH but running at the speed of compiled
code, and the 64 bit ARM instruction set looks
like a good starter.
FORTH was good stuff speed wise
I never used it in anger, but spent a lot of time thinking
about it. I seem to have on my bookshelf most of the FORTH
and TIL primers. I was considering something like a FORTH
but not being based upon Reverse Polish.
ISTR that FORTH on an RCA 1802 is in the Voyager missions?
Now, that was a weird instruction set! ISTR 8-off 16 bit
registers but no 16-bit moves, all having to be done in
8-bit chunks through the accumulator, and no conventional
subroutine call but change which of the 16-bit registers
at any time was the program counter!
On 22/01/2021 13:34, The Natural Philosopher wrote:[snip]
On 22/01/2021 13:22, gareth evans wrote:
ISTR that FORTH on an RCA 1802 is in the Voyager missions?
Now, that was a weird instruction set! ISTR 8-off 16 bit
registers but no 16-bit moves, all having to be done in
8-bit chunks through the accumulator, and no conventional
subroutine call but change which of the 16-bit registers
at any time was the program counter!
In my retirement, I have some ideas on language
development, essentially interactive as was BASIC
and FORTH but running at the speed of compiled
code, and the 64 bit ARM instruction set looks
like a good starter.
First 10 years as a professional softy were PDP11 assembler
on SCADA systems. Most challenging ISTR was a cassette tape driver
to run under our own realtime exec.
I started at a similar time (early 1970s) on a wierd device called the PDP-12 (an odd marriage of a PDP-8 and a university developed machine called a Linc-12).
Yes, I'm aware of that. Wasn't there some difficulty in on-the-fly
switching between the two instruction sets? I've the thing described
in a DEC sales clossy from 1971.
On 22.1.21 17.03, gareth evans wrote:
On 22/01/2021 13:34, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/01/2021 13:22, gareth evans wrote:
In my retirement, I have some ideas on language
development, essentially interactive as was BASIC
and FORTH but running at the speed of compiled
code, and the 64 bit ARM instruction set looks
like a good starter.
FORTH was good stuff speed wise
I never used it in anger, but spent a lot of time thinking
about it. I seem to have on my bookshelf most of the FORTH
and TIL primers. I was considering something like a FORTH
but not being based upon Reverse Polish.
ISTR that FORTH on an RCA 1802 is in the Voyager missions?
Now, that was a weird instruction set! ISTR 8-off 16 bit
registers but no 16-bit moves, all having to be done in
8-bit chunks through the accumulator, and no conventional
subroutine call but change which of the 16-bit registers
at any time was the program counter!
FORTH is as much Reverse Polish (Lukasciewicz) as the older
HP calculators.
ISTR that FORTH on an RCA 1802 is in the Voyager missions?
On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 13:22:21 +0000, gareth evans
<headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
In my retirement, I have some ideas on language
development, essentially interactive as was BASIC
and FORTH but running at the speed of compiled
code, and the 64 bit ARM instruction set looks
like a good starter.
MPE's VFX Forth family is a Forth compiler that generates
optimised native code. It is available for most operating
systems and deep embedded use. ARM64 support is coming.
On 22/01/2021 15:19, Tauno Voipio wrote:
On 22.1.21 17.03, gareth evans wrote:You misunderstood my comment.
On 22/01/2021 13:34, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/01/2021 13:22, gareth evans wrote:I never used it in anger, but spent a lot of time thinking about it. I
In my retirement, I have some ideas on language development,
essentially interactive as was BASIC and FORTH but running at the
speed of compiled code, and the 64 bit ARM instruction set looks
like a good starter.
FORTH was good stuff speed wise
seem to have on my bookshelf most of the FORTH and TIL primers. I was
considering something like a FORTH but not being based upon Reverse
Polish.
ISTR that FORTH on an RCA 1802 is in the Voyager missions?
Now, that was a weird instruction set! ISTR 8-off 16 bit registers but
no 16-bit moves, all having to be done in 8-bit chunks through the
accumulator, and no conventional subroutine call but change which of
the 16-bit registers at any time was the program counter!
FORTH is as much Reverse Polish (Lukasciewicz) as the older HP
calculators.
Let me rephrase ... I was considering a language without using reverse
polish along the lines of FORTH's interactiveness.
Den 2021-01-22 kl. 16:03, skrev gareth evans:
ISTR that FORTH on an RCA 1802 is in the Voyager missions?
I was at a fascinating talk in Madrid in 2015 by a guy at ESA and he
said (I can't remember which - or both) that either Rosetta or Philae
was coded i Forth, with design/coding started in 1994 and launched 10
years later.
I was at a fascinating talk in Madrid in 2015 by a guy at ESA
and he said (I can't remember which - or both) that either Rosetta or
Philae was coded i Forth, with design/coding started in 1994 and
launched 10 years later.
My thinking is that for any interactive program, there has to be
some form of tokenisation to represent the source program, so
why should not those tokens be the carefully-chosen unambiguous
machine code instructions that execute the code?
It is 50 years ago this year that I cut my teeth on a naked
PDP11/20 with no OS and only an assembler. Everything I did
was up to me.
Ah, but the normal process would be to enter the boot loader by hand,
then a bigger/better loader from paper tape and then the actual OS.
Or did you actually write naked assembler code to do things direct
with the hardware?
1. CHEAP without sending your money to China.
2. Really good performance with high clock, two cores (is this unique
for M0 boards?) and two PIO banks (killer feature).
3. Last but not least: fabulously extensive & comprehensive & high
quality documentation.
In comp.sys.raspberry-pi, A. Dumas <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> wrote:
1. CHEAP without sending your money to China.
Where is it made? I could not find that. I see "designed in UK", but
that sould like Apple's "designed in California".
Indeed. I've yet to find a need for more than eight bits in a >microcontroller, along with a maximum of 2KB of RAM. If I need more
power, it's a RPi.
In comp.sys.raspberry-pi, A. Dumas <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> wrote:
3. Last but not least: fabulously extensive & comprehensive & high
quality documentation.
The documentation I've seen does look first rate.
In comp.sys.raspberry-pi, Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
New Pico Pi for £3.60Hmm, not a real Pi in any sort of way at all, it's a microcontroller
<https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/raspberry-pi-pico>
with no OS. It's only a Pi because it's made by the same company.
Looks like it aims to be an Arduino competitor, so yeah, it's a
computer, but not in the same "runs a desktop" sense as the others in
the "Pi" lineage.
Elijah ------
it even looks like an Arduino
Op 22-01-2021 om 21:04 schreef Eli the Bearded:
Where is it made? I could not find that.Sony Inazawa, Japan https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/raspberry-pi-silicon-pico-now-on-sale/#comment-1549758
FORTH is as much Reverse Polish (Lukasciewicz) as the older
HP calculators.
On 2021-01-22, Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> wrote:
FORTH is as much Reverse Polish (Lukasciewicz) as the older
HP calculators.
Forth love if honk then
On 2021-01-22, Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> wrote:
FORTH is as much Reverse Polish (Lukasciewicz) as the older HP
calculators.
Forth love if honk then
| Sysop: | Rempala |
|---|---|
| Location: | Richlands, NC |
| Users: | 106 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 40:31:02 |
| Calls: | 205 |
| Files: | 6 |
| Messages: | 111,121 |