Hi Guys, I'll be the devil's advocate on this one ;)
> > The arduino language is really easy because some of the more > 'difficult' settings are already set for you. Te knife cut's both > sides -> easy for starters, limiting for the more advanced people. > Like the starter pack. > > But I think this can be fixed by making a custom library for this > board. > Like jallib! >> Pin count doesn't really matter in my oppinion. It does. I have the arduino with an atmega168 and ran out of pins before my project was completed. I'd go for a 40 pin chip or larger (smd gives you more pins at the small form factor, which is nice. But it is less easy to build and repair). >> It's more the number >> of specific pins (like there are 3-6 PWM pins on an atmega168), there >> are only 2 on a 16F877. Now you get close to the most anoyning thing of 'doning the best you can for a use that does not know what he is doing'. In arduino, all IO pins seem to be equal. So on a 20 pin board, you can configure 20 pwm signals. But when you use them, you might notice that they don't all behave like expected. Depending on the chip, some pin's support pwm and work fine. But others don't support pwm and will be set either high or low (depending of the pwm value). And similar, you might need two pwm's, say for an h-bridge. If you read the datasheet, you will choose two related one's, so you only need one timer and limited setup code. But with arduino, you try (!!) until you have two pins working like you want to. And probably make less efficient use of you hardware (two timers etc). Similar issue's are there for use digital ports in the way that you are not encouraged to put related pins on the same port etc. This kind of issue's made me switch halfway my arduino project: dismantle the arduino framework, only keeping the required libraries as includes for c++ and work form there. Much better! (and you regain some options from C++ that are lost with arduino). Or to make a long story short: IMO it is a bad idea to shield the hardware features from the user. It's like designing a car for drivers that do not know it is common to use the left front seat. It creates a lot of issues to be handled and a lot of work while it is not unreasonable to expect a driver to know which seat to take. >> > I think too that such a board has to be kept really cheap to be >> > successful. But also an easy programming language ( could be a problem >> > too with JAL) I realy wonder why you state this. What makes Arduino more easy to use then Jal? Are this the super-include and function (names) provided?? Joep --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
