whats this got to do with a beaglebone ? On 8/7/2016 3:44 PM, Harvey White wrote: > I'm considering moving from an Atmel XMEGA environment to and ARM > environment. (various reasons, one being the purchase of Atmel by > Microchip and some corresponding price increases...) > > I'm looking at the following scenario: > > 1) buying an explorer/development board: Nucleo 64 bit with a F446RET6 > processor from STM. Seems to have the highest performance for > processor intensive solutions and would support daughterboards with > memory access (good for things like displays and extra memory). > > 2) I will probably (for these designs) go bare metal. The reasoning > is that I do not want Linux at the moment, and these are embedded > building blocks of larger systems. I already have an operating system > that needs to be rewritten (low level drivers only) for the ARM. It > already exists for the Xmega.... no, it's not FreeRtos. (there are > reasons). > > 2A) kinds of designs are display drivers mostly, which is where I need > the most processing power. May end up keeping the Xmega stuff for > smaller functions, that's not all that bad depending on what Microchip > does with the prices (already up some....) > > 3) Assuming that a 13 dollar development board will do well enough > (it's cheaper than I can make a board and populate it), and that there > are enough processor pins to run the daughter boards (which I don't > mind designing)... > > 4) What development tools are there that would work reasonably well? > I'd be using the (purchased with board) ST_link protocol. > > 5) cost IS an object, so I'd be looking for a free version that is NOT > code size limited. I've had Xmega projects at about 100K bytes of > code, which knocks out the "go see what it's like then pay us money" > approach of the major compiler vendors. > > 6) I'm hoping that people here with experience in ARM development have > some preferences and could help. The BBB is not a hardware candidate > for several reasons, one being cost (I tend to do distributed systems, > which means lots of processors), another of which is simply > complexity. A processor with add-ons (Arduino approach) seems to be a > minimalist hardware approach, which for now, is worth investigating. > > Currently I am using the AVR studio IDE, and developing in either C or > C++, PC projects tend to be Lazarus Pascal for historical reasons and > the fact that Microsoft's .net framework drives me up a wall. > > Comments welcome, and if this is sufficiently off topic for the group, > please reply directly. Also would like to hear about inexpensive > hardware development boards that might work. Considered the PSOC 5LP > boards, but they're such a loss leader that I wonder if they're going > to be permanent... Then again, everything changes. > > Thanks > > Harvey >
-- For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BeagleBoard" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beagleboard/51e67e6f-8841-1b12-0efd-4cc26b3384a2%40gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
