The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: Chuck Simmons
Organization: You jest.
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.0.33 i586)
Subject: Re: Basic Stamp vs Pic processors
References: <3D9F33B3.E4B561BB@webaccess.net> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <3D9F5649.57327EDF@webaccess.net> <email@example.com>
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2002 03:11:46 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 20:11:46 PDT
Frank Bemelman wrote:
> "Chuck Simmons" schreef in bericht
> > The loss of line numbers from Basic would seem to render it purposeless.
> > After all, Basic was invented to teach students how to increment line
> > numbers.
> Well, since it still is an interpreted language in most cases, so you have
> the advantage that it doesn't crash the system. It can safely escape,
> complaining about an undesired situation occured at runtime etc. Without the
> linenumbers it is a lot like other procedural languages, like pascal or C.
No. I don't think so. Basic does not have proper data types. Not that I
have ever seen. Basic inherited implicit variables from Fortran and that
makes Basic programs difficult to debug because typos work.
Pascal has strong data typing and data structures. It requires
declaration of variables in advance so typos typically don't work. The
rigorous data typing makes some tasks difficult but the structure makes
the language readable and largely self documenting. In fact, I have seen
assembly programs commented with Pascal to make algorithms clear.
C has weak data typing and data structures and C++ adds objects. Weak
data typing allows implicit conversions. Generally C allows convenience
in writing algorithms that are difficult to express in Basic or Pascal
in that it provides access to more primative functions.
> In my book, assembly is dead. C has become an excellent replacement, now
> that processors have become much faster - and cheaper. Programmable logic
> has also helped making assembly become redundant. Stuff that requires
> speed can often be isolated enough into function blocks that can be
> with programmable logic. The less speed-demanding stuff can be done all in
> C/C++. I never liked Forth, I tried it a couple of times, but it's too stack
> oriented for me, I have difficulties translating my 'problems' into Forth.
In embedded systems, memory is very expensive. The reason is that memory
is a silicon hog. It is so nasty that one would not have it if it could
be avoided. Consider an optimal chip design that just fits a pad limited
die that just fits a package with the right number of pins. Now add more
memory. Yikes! The die grows out of the pad limited size and becomes too
big for the desired package die cavity. Very very bad because the larger
package costs more. OK, why not an external bus? Wrong answer. More
chips cost more. An external bus requires more pins so cost goes up.
Major loser. If that's you best shot, pack your personal stuff and go
... The times have been,
That, when the brains were out,
the man would die. ... Macbeth
Chuck Simmons firstname.lastname@example.org
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup