Need some help choosing...

[digital_blue]

Well, I've been looking around for an easy language to learn for microcontrollers and I can't seem to find one. I have very limited programming knowledge/ background. The most I've done is a bit(10 commands or so) of GWbasic programming. I've tried to learn PIC assembly but it is proving to be frustrating and difficult. I'm considering the Parallax propeller as a platform since the SPIN language appears to be easy to learn. I'm also considering the PICAXE series of microcontrollers since it has the flowcharting option. I would prefer not to learn VB, C or any other high-level languages since they are more complicated.

Can anyone suggest a platform with a simple to learn language?

thanks

 

[Pommie]

I would suggest you get a Junebug (see Bill's site) and use Swordfish Basic. The free version of swordfish is more than most people ever need.

Mike.

 

[digital_blue]

I am already set up for PICs; I just haven't been able to find a language that is easy to learn. Are there any tutorials for Swordfish basic? I am programming illiterate except for print, goto, gosub statements...

 

[3v0]

Swordfish Basic works with the PIC 18F family.

What programmer do you have.

 

[digital_blue]

I'm using a PICKIT2 programmer along with Bill's firefly. I have a stash of 16f PICs and I'd prefer to stick with them if possible.

 

[Pommie]

With the 16 series pics your choice is quite limited. Many here have started to use the (free) boost C compiler. If you have to learn a language then C is probably a good one to start with. I have a firefly and could knock up an example to get you started.

Mike.

 

[AllVol]

I'm using a PICKIT2 programmer along with Bill's firefly. I have a stash of 16f PICs and I'd prefer to stick with them if possible.

PICBasicPro is a limited free down load that is supported by MPlab. It is a standard basic language and is easy to learn. The on-line manual gives complete instructions for use.

Go to the melabs website and download the readme file. It gives the 16F chips that are supported (most of the standards).

 

[Torben]

Hi digital_blue,

Just to clear something up: don't be scared of higher-level languages because they are more complicated; they're not. For instance, BASIC is higher level than C, which is higher than assembly, which is higher than machine code. A flowcharting language is quite high-level--which means farther from the hardware.

There are pros and cons to both high and low level languages. The higher the level, the less you have to know about the actual hardware. The lower the level, the greater the control you have over things like timing. (I'm making some broad generalizations here.)

Some languages allow you to mix assembly inline with a higher-level language (like C or Pascal) so that you can control critical sections of code as tightly as you like.

My advice would be to learn PIC assembly and also to learn C. Maybe it's a bit difficult to get your head around at first, with no programming experience, but it's worth it. To do neat things you'll need to learn neat things.


Torben

 

[ericgibbs]

I Are there any tutorials for Swordfish basic? I am programming illiterate except for print, goto, gosub statements...

hi,
Look at Gramo's link for Swordfish and Bill's link for 18F's below for tutorials.
A simple Basic is PICAxe, free downloads.

 

[Pommie]

A simple Basic is PICAxe, free downloads.

Eric,

While the software is free, don't you have to pay an inflated price for the actual chips?

Mike.

 

[Space Varmint]

I would stick with assembler. It's probably the internal architecture that is confusing you a bit. Where you have to switch banks to initialize various registers and that sticky jump table using the "RetLW" instruction. But you will really gain allot of understanding of the internal hardware and once you cross a few hurdles you will have it mastered. With the knowledge of assembler you will find it much easier to design with other processors as well. Some of the small embedded processors from Intel will be very straight forward like the 80188 family.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

Eric,

While the software is free, don't you have to pay an inflated price for the actual chips?

The chips are remarkably cheap, nothing like BASIC STAMP's.

 

[AllVol]

The chips are remarkably cheap, nothing like BASIC STAMP's.

Dollar for dollar, PICaxe is probably the cheapest way to get into PIC programming and use. The chips are available stateside for as little as $4.00. And has been mentioned, compiler is free, and there is no programmer necessary, just a serial cable (can be home-brewed easily).

 

[Mike - K8LH]

Depends on your budget too, I suppose. For me, "free" is the keyword and my favorite so far for it's 16F' support and generous free/lite version limitations is Sourceboost BoostC.

Honestly, there's not much difference between BASIC and C. Also, and unfortunately, no matter how good they are, BASIC still lacks the "professional" status of assembler and C.

My 2 cents. Mike

 

[Mike - K8LH]

Dollar for dollar, PICaxe is probably the cheapest way to get into PIC programming and use. The chips are available stateside for as little as $4.00. And has been mentioned, compiler is free, and there is no programmer necessary, just a serial cable (can be home-brewed easily).

I agree (with qualifiers).

(1) It's an interpreted BASIC implementation so you'll never get the same speed as you do with assembler or compiled BASIC or C programs. Probably not a "big deal" for many apps'.

(2) It forces you to use limited pin functions they define. Also may not be a "big deal" for many apps'.

As you mentioned, the included serial-to-EEPROM program loading process is a big plus since no programmer is required.

I've never used one and probably never will. I suspect they're easy to outgrow as you gain knowledge, experience, and a device programmer (grin).

Mike

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

I've never used one and probably never will. I suspect they're easy to outgrow as you gain knowledge, experience, and a device programmer (grin).

I've never used one either, but they seem squarely aimed at schools, their low price and ease of use make them ideal for educational purposes.

 

[AllVol]

I agree (with qualifiers).

(1) It's an interpreted BASIC implementation so you'll never get the same speed as you do with assembler or compiled BASIC or C programs. Probably not a "big deal" for many apps'.

(2) It forces you to use limited pin functions they define. Also may not be a "big deal" for many apps'.

As you mentioned, the included serial-to-EEPROM program loading process is a big plus since no programmer is required.

I've never used one and probably never will. I suspect they're easy to outgrow as you gain knowledge, experience, and a device programmer (grin).

Mike

Hi, Mike

As the old saying goes, don't knock it 'til you try it.

I'm not suggesting the PICaxe will ever replace other systems, but I do maintain it is the easiest and cheapest way to get one's feet wet in this field.

And the greatest value is the ease with which one can later move into more advance areas. If a person has already learned PWM, ADC, I^C, LCD etc. on the PICaxe, then stepping up to more powerful and faster systems is much easier, I feel. At least, that's the way it has been for me. I definately feel my prior experience with PICaxe has made my transision into assembly and boostc, and the larger PICs, much easier. In other words, I already spoke the language.

Check out R H Anderson's web site, and even order out an 18X. You might be surprised.

Regards

 

[futz]

I've never used one and probably never will. I suspect they're easy to outgrow as you gain knowledge, experience, and a device programmer (grin).

I have an 18X Picaxe. Bought it a while back because I was curious. Easy as pie to use. But it bored me. No challenge. Haven't used it since that first day I got it.

Started out in microcontrollers a long time ago with a Basic Stamp 2 on a B.O.E. It taught me a lot, but was just not doing it for me speed or capability-wise.

I was interested in the Arduino, but realized it was going to be more of the same, so I didn't buy one.

If you just want to get simple stuff done (and even some not so simple stuff), have little interest in the hardware and don't want to learn much more than the very basics of programming, the BASIC Stamp, Picaxe, Arduino and many others of their type are perfect for you.

But if you want much more flexibility and capability and speed, then go for just a normal PIC or AVR or whatever. They both have free assemblers and there are plenty of free demo language compilers around (C and BASIC mostly), so you can take your pick.

 

[futz]

Check out R H Anderson's web site, and even order out an 18X. You might be surprised.

You must mean Peter H. Anderson's site, right?

 

[AllVol]

You must mean Peter H. Anderson's site, right?

Yeah. Sliplsies.