freeSoC and freeSoC Mini • Hacker News Board

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#11

Post by revelation » Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 5:06 PM UTC

shadowmint wrote: post #8

forgottenpaswrd wrote: post #6

The best Microcontroller? Does it works on Linux or mac?. No. It that software opensource? No Why then I should choose this thing instead of more powerful and closed micros like this?: http://www.microchip.com/stellent/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_P...

I think we can all agree that the arduino IDE is a terrible piece of software. It works... on most platforms. It's not bloated. It's kind of documented. That's about all the good you can say about it. ...but I have to agree, sounds like this is a neat platform, but if I can't write, compile and deploy code to it, what's the point? Is it really that hard to provide a tool chain that lets you cross compile binaries for…

Arduino is just an AVR processor nicely wrapped. They offer their own IDE so you don't have to bother with the difficulties in getting your code on your device.

Atmel maintains an AVR port of the GNU toolchain and provides their own IDE based on Visual Studio.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#12

Post by mtdev » Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 5:38 PM UTC

revelation wrote: post #10

Is there stable support for this architecture in GCC and related projects? That is, is there a standard-conforming open toolchain? Otherwise I wouldn't even bother.

PSoC5 is supported by GCC, the Cypress PSoC IDE just makes it easier for novices to get started. There is also a FreeRTOS port to PSoC5, so you can get into some pretty interesting stuff.

That aside, I am really glad they went with PSoC5 (ARM Cortex-M3 architecture) instead of the cheaper PSoC3 (8051 architecture). This makes it easy to prototype on the PSoC5 and then move to a more specialized Cortex when they hit performance limits.

Finally, I don't see mechanical drawings, however, I hope they spaced the parallel connectors on freeSOC n*0.1" apart. One of the frustrating things about Arduino is that the spacing on the shield connector is non-standard, so you can't simply plug it into a breadboard.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#13

Post by vonmoltke » Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 5:49 PM UTC

revelation wrote: post #11

shadowmint wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we can all agree that the arduino IDE is a terrible piece of software. It works... on most platforms. It's not bloated. It's kind of documented. That's about all the good you can say about it. ...but I have to agree, sounds like this is a neat platform, but if I can't write, compile and deploy code to it, what's the point? Is it really that hard to provide a tool chain that lets you cross compile binaries for…

Arduino is just an AVR processor nicely wrapped. They offer their own IDE so you don't have to bother with the difficulties in getting your code on your device. Atmel maintains an AVR port of the GNU toolchain and provides their own IDE based on Visual Studio.

Eclipse + AVRdude is also an excellent IDE for Arduino development.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#14

Post by ReadEvalPost » Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 5:55 PM UTC

forgottenpaswrd wrote: post #6

The best Microcontroller? Does it works on Linux or mac?. No. It that software opensource? No Why then I should choose this thing instead of more powerful and closed micros like this?: http://www.microchip.com/stellent/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_P...

More powerful in what way?

I don't think there are any PICs with integrated PLD blocks, or GPIOs that are routable to any peripheral. "Best" may be a silly term for it, but that's definitely really useful to have in a development board.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#15

Post by eckyptang » Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 6:08 PM UTC

forgottenpaswrd wrote: post #6

The best Microcontroller? Does it works on Linux or mac?. No. It that software opensource? No Why then I should choose this thing instead of more powerful and closed micros like this?: http://www.microchip.com/stellent/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_P...

The best Microcontroller is the one that works for you and does what you need. In my case I bought a few of these and they rock:

http://www.ghielectronics.com/catalog/product/353

(I also don't have to piss around with C+RTOS for what I need - it's just a C# program!)

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#16

Post by teraflop » Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 6:08 PM UTC

revelation wrote: post #10

Is there stable support for this architecture in GCC and related projects? That is, is there a standard-conforming open toolchain? Otherwise I wouldn't even bother.

Looks that way. The basic architecture is ARM, which is quite well-supported by GCC and binutils. I managed to find a Technical Reference Manual on Cypress' website, which seems to have plenty of information on the hardware peripherals: http://www.cypress.com/?docID=36586

This thing seems to occupy an interesting point in the hobbyist ecosystem. The processor is several times more expensive than other chips with similar raw processing power (like TI's Stellaris LaunchPad, which sells for $5) but the I/O peripherals are vastly more flexible. It looks like a fantastic device for prototyping and experimenting.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#17

Post by Zenst » Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 6:59 PM UTC

Best pair of odd sock(sic) I've seen in ages.

What is interesting is the ability to program them via a graphical drag and drop style visual programming language and that is something for people learning that will appeal strongly. As for the specs and abilities I shall leave that to those more vested in this microcontroller.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#18

Post by FigBug » Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 7:42 PM UTC

ReadEvalPost wrote: post #14

forgottenpaswrd wrote: post #6

The best Microcontroller? Does it works on Linux or mac?. No. It that software opensource? No Why then I should choose this thing instead of more powerful and closed micros like this?: http://www.microchip.com/stellent/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_P...

More powerful in what way? I don't think there are any PICs with integrated PLD blocks, or GPIOs that are routable to any peripheral. "Best" may be a silly term for it, but that's definitely really useful to have in a development board.

In the dsPIC family, any RP pin is routable to any peripheral. Most GPIO pins are also RP pins.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#19

Post by ReadEvalPost » Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 7:48 PM UTC

FigBug wrote: post #18

ReadEvalPost wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More powerful in what way? I don't think there are any PICs with integrated PLD blocks, or GPIOs that are routable to any peripheral. "Best" may be a silly term for it, but that's definitely really useful to have in a development board.

In the dsPIC family, any RP pin is routable to any peripheral. Most GPIO pins are also RP pins.

Ah, I haven't used any of the dsPICs. Thanks for the info.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#20

Post by pvidler » Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 8:44 PM UTC

mtdev wrote: post #12

revelation wrote: post #10

Is there stable support for this architecture in GCC and related projects? That is, is there a standard-conforming open toolchain? Otherwise I wouldn't even bother.

PSoC5 is supported by GCC, the Cypress PSoC IDE just makes it easier for novices to get started. There is also a FreeRTOS port to PSoC5, so you can get into some pretty interesting stuff. That aside, I am really glad they went with PSoC5 (ARM Cortex-M3 architecture) instead of the cheaper PSoC3 (8051 architecture). This makes it easy to prototype on the PSoC5 and then move to a more specialized Cortex when they hit p…

Just from the descriptions and photos, it looks like the mini will be breadboardable.

The bigger one almost certainly not -- it's arduino compatible and the gap on one side is visibly smaller than the other. Also, it's not clear if the big one will have pins dropping down below the board (just looks like female headers).