Connect with us

16-bit + basic programming

Discussion in 'Electronic Design' started by M.Pathma, Jul 9, 2006.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. M.Pathma

    M.Pathma Guest

    Hi,

    I am currently developing my project with 8-bit micro and would like to
    explore the 16-bit or the ARM series, my problem is I am "expert" in Basic
    language ... and "dump-stupid" in C-complier.

    Can anyone please point me to a 16-bit/ARM Basic complier and chip
    manufacture.

    I have been searching Basic Complier & development board for ARM6/7/8/9.

    Any help in this area will be appericiated.

    Thanks
    M.Pathma
    MALAYSIA.
     
  2. PeteS

    PeteS Guest

    I would suggest you *learn* C. It's not really that difficult
    (especially if you know hardware). Much depends on what you mean by
    BASIC, of course, but I have to say I heartily agree with this quote
    from Edsger Dijkstra (a legend in computing, in case you didn't know)

    "It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students
    that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they
    are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration."

    He's talking more about the issues with BASIC than the ability of good
    minds :)

    See this page for more quotes:
    http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Edsger_Dijkstra

    There are voluminous resources on C, and if you want to do any hardware
    centric computing, BASIC makes it 'difficult' to say the least (well,
    you have peek and poke, but that's rather a kludge).

    I will agree that VB has helped somewhat (it's actually structured,
    after a fashion), but there are subtle (and not so subtle) issues with
    it that make me personally avoid it like the plague.

    Cheers

    PeteS
     
  3. [...]
    Dijkstra's no legend to me. In my eyes he's just a fart programmer.
    He's absolutely right though!. Prior exposure to BASIC completely destroys
    any hope of a subject becoming pliant enough to accept "C" brainwashing.
    I know of these things from personal experience, as at an early age I was
    fortunate enough to be suckled from the warm and bountiful teat of Basic.

    It's not that I've haven't made valiant efforts to align myself with the C
    language. Lord, oh Lord, how I've tried. I spent a whole 3 months last year
    back engineering a C programmers 'work' and for the past 2 weeks have been
    writing a hardware control prog' in C. But ... no matter how hard I try to
    ignore my preconditioning, I still look at the C stuff that I or other
    people have written, or read the programming reference manuals and can only
    ever see screeds of contrived-to-be-awkward' text constructs. Most of all
    though, I look at the stuff and think "god that is ugly and impenetrable".
    John Larkin had it spot on, with a comment that it's a language composed of
    punctuation marks.
    (no I'm not a programmer).
    john
     
  4. Fred Bloggs

    Fred Bloggs Guest

    As a last resort, you can "develop" your program in BASIC and then use a
    translator such as http://rjpcomputing.com/?page_id=6/ . Make sure you
    use a compiler with an IDE ( integrated development environment) that
    allows breakpoints and sissy-stepping through every little thing you do.
     
  5. Ken Smith

    Ken Smith Guest

    .... or a "disintegrated" debugger that does the same sort of stuff.

    One thing to check is how fast the debugger gets in and out of a single
    step or break point. If it is over about 5 seconds, worry about how much
    time you will spend waiting.

    You want to be able to do the following:

    Go until one of N breakpoints is hit. Where N>1.

    Step by one source statement

    Step by one instruction

    View the contents of a variable as understood by the compiler

    View the contents of memory as a hex dump

    View the code as disassembled instructions

    View the content of any special function registers


    The following are nice to also have:

    Conditional break points so you can have a variable's value checked

    Go till the routine returns

    Change a variable's contents on the fly so you can continue testing after
    the first bug is found

    Looping constructs more complex than just the conditional breakpoints sort
    of like "go til line 57; variable i=7; loop until j=32"

    The ability to write what you do to a log-file
     
  6. Luhan

    Luhan Guest

    I agree, debugging facilities are most important. Most all of my PC
    software is still written in Borland Turbo C. They invented (as far as
    I can tell) the integrated debugger environment.

    Code - Compile - Run - Ooops - Debug - Code ... etc.

    Luhan
     
  7. PeteS

    PeteS Guest

    One can write horrible code in any language, of course. I have seen
    plenty of it in most languages, especially from hardware designers (of
    which I am one) but often from software engineers.

    The difference (for the OP) is that C is supported in many forms for
    this target, whereas BASIC is not.

    I will say that properly written C is clean and readable, but to
    someone who expects to find everything defined in one place it *will*
    be difficult. Composed of punctuation? good point, but so is Verilog
    and VHDL.

    C is not going to save you from yourself; in this sense it is an
    assembly language programmer's high level language. You are completely
    free to trash the entire system (but then you are free to do that in
    assembly too), but then it was written as a systems level language.

    There are many arguments for and against just about every language in
    existence, many of them well deserved. One uses the language that works
    best for a particular situation.

    An old tagline was 'Unix is user friendly. It's just very particular
    who it's friends are', and there's a lot of truth in that. As C was
    designed by the same person as co-wrote the original Unix[tm] [dmr],
    it's hardly surprising to find the same arguments ;)

    Cheers

    PeteS
     
  8. PeteS

    PeteS Guest

    Dijkstra is also credited with saying 'I have yet to meet a C compiler
    easier to use than eating soup wth a fork'. He was an equal opportunity
    criticiser :)

    Certainly trying to decipher the warning/error outputs of cc [or gcc
    for that matter] is one of life's challenges ;)

    Cheers

    PeteS
     
  9. Ken Smith

    Ken Smith Guest

    If they didn't invent it, it sure is a standard against which others can
    be compared. As of yet I haven't seen one that was better. There is now
    "free pascal" with an almost perfect copy of the Borland IDE. It runs on
    many systems.

    Also: The Pascal compiler is very fast. It looks to be a classic
    recursive decent compiler where the first error stops it.
     
  10. Luhan

    Luhan Guest

    I wrote a C cross compiler modeled after Borland. It ran under DOS
    and sent out Z80 code to the target on bi-directional bit-bang lines.
    There was no hardware emulator, but it did source level trace with
    variable watch. Only 3 functions were needed at the target: Write
    memory location with data, Read data from location, Goto to location.

    Since the compiler had access to the symbol table, variables could be
    asked for by name and the debugger just looked up there address in the
    target and requested that location.

    Trace was done by reading a known location specified by the source
    line, writing in a 'trap' instruction, and executing from the current
    location until the trap was reached.

    The total program size was 83K which included the editor, compiler,
    debugger, and code generators for both Z80 and 68000. All written in
    Borland Turbo C.

    Luhan
     
  11. PeteS

    PeteS Guest

    Turbo C was perhaps one of the best compilers I ever used. Lean and
    mean, excellent documentation. My first copy was 'borrowed' from a
    friend in college c. 1988 (the price was $50 if I recall correctly) and
    was the first decent IDE I ever saw - in my opinion, it still beats
    many of the so-called IDes out there today.

    Cheers

    PeteS
     
  12. Joe Soap

    Joe Soap Guest

    In response to what PeteS <> posted in

    The two languages I write in these days, from choice, are C and Pascal.

    Pascal tries to stop me from doing what has to be done: C lets me do what
    ought not to be done.

    Choose your evil!
     
  13. Brian

    Brian Guest


    The best route is to learn generic object oriented programming methodology,
    then C. Helps kill off the BASIC thinking.
     
  14. Luhan

    Luhan Guest

    I once worked with a guy who got hired because my boss saw him in a
    bookstore wearing a t-shirt that said:

    C is to C++ as Brain is to Brain Tumor.

    Luhan
     
  15. Luhan

    Luhan Guest


    Yes indeed Sahib, you have that most exactly correct !

    Luhan
     
  16. Brian

    Brian Guest

    About correct, though. Its that age old concept of taking something simple
    and useable... and screwing with it until its so f*'d up, its useless.
     
  17. David Brown

    David Brown Guest

  18. joseph2k

    joseph2k Guest

    If you think C is bad you ought to try APL. It is so full of punctuation
    marks and contrived punctuation marks that only impenetrable function and
    variable names are left. It even takes special software (previously done
    in hardware) to even view it. It has its own extensive character set (500+
    symbols i think).
     
  19. Ken Smith

    Ken Smith Guest

    I think APL is a good language. "Life is too short to spend it coding DO
    loops". In many ways it is like assembly programming on a machine that
    just happens to do arrays automatically.
    Most implementations allow longish names so you can make the names mean
    stuff.

    For those that done know: In APL, funtion calls are written:

    function
    function right
    left function right

    Where "left" and "right" are arguments.


    This makes:

    Mary had a little lamb, some potatoes and some carrots

    a perfectly good APL statement. This is all done without a single
    #define. Now I think you can see that APL is a truely lovely language.
     
  20. jasen

    jasen Guest

    a standard VGA display could support 512-symbol fonts in text mode,
    (trading blink for the extra bit of character iirc)
    the original lisp machines used an extended character set too.
    Lambda was a single symbol, dunno about "car" and "cdr"

    perl can be pretty indecipherable too and it's all ASCII.

    ISTM that any unicode text editor would be fine for APL or LISP these days.

    Bye.
    Jasen
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-