Re: [Botix-devel] HAL for Botix

[Just4 F. <rb...@ho...>]

Hi all,

I know that classes etc are the way to program nowadays. However, Atmel 
controllers are not designed to have classes or anything. They are just made 
to run some simple assembler code. There is hardly any RAM, so what does it 
benifit? If Botix should remain compatible, you should consider, that RAM 
usage should be minimized to almost any price. The least price is 
programmmers convienience. Please consider RAM usage, and (maybe) possible 
compiler options to avoid RAM usage.

>>For i2c we can use some kind of virtual device, which is what the
>>compass driver uses when executing commands. Port expanders can use
>>multiple pins and just have to be defined, right?
Port expanders are just a way of interfacing the controllers. They don't 
have to know anything about what is going on, they just have to interface / 
expand. So they should just be an extra interfacing layer, that can be 
addressed by input/output devices, as if it was just processor hardware.

>nope, the expander is connected to i2c. You're talking about a shift 
>register. (cheaper, but requires a number of io pins.)
This problem should also be solved if an expander is just regarded as some 
way to interface between controller and periphials, but not as an item on 
itself. It does not contribute to the robot, it contributes to the 
controller.

Although the previous may sound negativ, I still think that the 
implementation of such a layer is an improvement on Botix. Only thing is 
that an ATmega32 may not be considered as a standard Atmel controller. It is 
a controller that comes out of the Atmel top line. I think you should also 
test your software on a cheaper controller????

Greetz,

Richard