Re: [Amforth] Simulation of AVR with Amforth in simavr? (And: Unnescessary multiple writes to EEPROM?)

[Erich W. <ew....@na...>]

Hi,

On 11/24/2013 07:13 PM, Enoch wrote:
> Dear Matthias,
> 
> I understand that Mikael ("FlashForth") represents "the competition" but
> his point, in my opinion, cannot be ignored. All those frequently
> changing variables from amforth-eprom.inc should not stay just EEPROM
> based:
> 
> EE_DP:   ; Dictionary Pointer
> EE_HERE: ; Memory Allocation
> EE_EDP:  ; EEProm Memory Allocation
> 
> I intend to fix that in my amforth-shadow git but I prefer that you
> would take the lead.
> 
> The solution is simple, XT_DP, XT_HERE and XT_EDP should be RAM
> variables that are initialized from the EEPROM on cold start. A new
> immediate word, let's say "eesy" (EEPROM sync), would do the RAM to EE
> sync. To be on the safe side let tools/amforth-shell.py issue this
> "eesy" for us automatically before exit...

Hmm. If I understand your approach correctly: *I* have to call eesy before
powering down the controller. Otherwise my newly compiled words are lost?
And *frequently* means exactly: every time the compiler is run or , and friends
are called (I use up flash space).

Do I miss something? 

I can confirm what Matthias said earlier:
I have a bunch of atmega32 controllers, which I use since I started with avr
controllers 10 years ago. They are thus far not exhibiting any behaviour that would
point to bad eeprom or flash.

Just my 2 cent.

Cheers,
Erich