Thread: IFI Critique
View Single Post
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-07-2006, 20:02
John Gutmann John Gutmann is offline
I'm right here
AKA: sparksandtabs
FRC #0340 (GRR)
Team Role: Mechanical
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: rochester
Posts: 804
John Gutmann has a brilliant futureJohn Gutmann has a brilliant futureJohn Gutmann has a brilliant futureJohn Gutmann has a brilliant futureJohn Gutmann has a brilliant futureJohn Gutmann has a brilliant futureJohn Gutmann has a brilliant futureJohn Gutmann has a brilliant futureJohn Gutmann has a brilliant futureJohn Gutmann has a brilliant futureJohn Gutmann has a brilliant future
Send a message via AIM to John Gutmann Send a message via MSN to John Gutmann Send a message via Yahoo to John Gutmann
Re: IFI Critique

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Johnson
STAMP2 is not a step in the right direction to be sure. The problems we had with STAMP2s as a control mechanism were many and various -- complex & unweldy programming slots, unsigned 16 bit math, no interrupts, poorly implemented UART, and so on.

It was basically easy to do easy stuff using PBASIC, but anything complex took a guru to implement.

I think there are better micros/languages to use.

Joe J.
Once again, I am not saying that using the BS2 is a step in the right direction. I never said anywhere that I wanted to use it. I simply said that I have seen it used in a setting that needs more complex coding than what we do. So it is possible to use it. But I don't necessarily think that using a microchip processor is the best thing either.