Re: [Botix-devel] HAL for Botix
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
vorik2005
|
From: Just4 F. <rb...@ho...> - 2005-11-13 22:37:23
|
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 |