But the MSP430 can do quite good graphics. The second application I ever
did used monochrome graphics. if by graphics you mean full motion video,
then no, the MSP430 won't handle it. But I've used it to do real time
graphics imaging on my Oyster grader, for example, for 3D tomography of
human tissue, and for matching photographed images to a data base (about
2000 images), and the latter was done on a 2131, so you can't discount
it for odd applications, besides the usual suspects such as graphical
user interface, and graphing stored or real time data.

Cheers

Al

old_cow_yellow wrote:
> Using LabVIEW to generate MSP430 code is one thing. Using MSP430 to do what LabVIEW does is quite different.
>
> Earlier on, others were talking about graphic language. They were not talking about using MSP430 to do graphics either.
>
> --- In m..., "Boyd, David" wrote:
>> Wow... LabVIEW targeted to run on an MSP430. Now that's quite a tall
>> order. But they've managed to target ADI BlackFin, some FPGA devices
>> they sell, etc., so I wouldn't rule anything out J
>>
>>
>>
>> But there are so many features that mainstream LabVIEW developers take
>> for granted that would be either left behind (or severely stripped down)
>> to target an MSP430; TCP/UDP, serial, IEEE-488, floating-point math are
>> just the few that spring to mind.
>>
>>
>>
>> But it's good to have dreams, eh?
>>
>>
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>> David J. Boyd
>>
>> Senior Test Engineer
>>
>> Home Respiratory Care
>>
>> Home Healthcare Solutions
>>
>> Philips Healthcare
>>
>> 175 Chastain Meadows Court NW
>>
>> Kennesaw GA USA 30144-3724
>>
>> Office: 770-429-2809
>>
>> david.boyd@...
>>
>>
>>
>> From: m... [mailto:m...] On Behalf
>> Of cro83
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 09:20
>> To: m...
>> Subject: [msp430] Re: Basic compiler for MSP430
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> There could be one in Basic, C/C++, LabView, Pascal, Python, etc., etc.
>>
>> The power of the msp430 is that an engineer, or even a technician such
>> as myself, can learn to use an MCU in only a few hours of training with
>> the module. Even though I had never used Microprocessors in any of my
>> designs before, I was able to implement the MSP430 with few problems. Of
>> course I would have gotten nowhere without the example code provided by
>> TI and I still base my designs around that code. One issue I had, was
>> that I was familier with Visual Basic, but not C++, so there was another
>> short learning curve to turn. I could have finished my design two or
>> three days earlier with a VB compiler.
>>
>> Using LabView for MSP430 compiling would be a tremendous boost to the
>> number of people able to use the microprocessor. This would allow
>> technicians with almost no software knowledege to be able to
>> troubleshoot software related issues and design workarounds and upgrades
>> to existing firmware.
>>
>> Frankly I am suprised that some of the software geniuses out there
>> haven't already written compilers just for the challenge.
>>
>> Make no mistake, I would not pay a lot of money for it because, if a
>> person is at all familiar with just about any software, that person
>> should be able to quickly pick up C and C++, but it would be useful for
>> those people that don't use microprocessors because they think it is too
>> much to have to learn.
>>
>> Just my thoughts. . . .
>>
>> --- In m... ,
>> "Stephan Portier" wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I wanted to ask users for something. Is there any interest in a basic
>>> compiler for msp430 series?
>>>
>>> I want to write a basic or Pascal compiler for this chip and wanted to
>> know
>>> if users really have interest or no.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> =======================================================================>> The information contained in this message may be confidential and legally protected under applicable law. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, forwarding, dissemination, or reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
>>
>>
>

Beginning Microcontrollers with the MSP430

Tony,

(aside - I am glad to see this thread seems to have grown some legs...)

Here's a way to think about this - C lends itself towards RISC machines -
the MSP430 falls into this category. In fact, the microprocessor core has
been designed to make languages like C very efficient.

Classically, BASIC maps to CISC (Complex Instruction-Set Computer) types of
microprocessors/microcontrollers. Think of the Z80 (years ago) and the 8086
core.

So historically, this is why things have happened the way they have.

Also, historically, when C became available, BASIC was dropped like a bad
habit. Some of us that have been around for awhile can attest to that. The
Z80 was about the only platform I can remember that had BASIC that didn't
make me want to barf. The TI9900 was ahead of its time but I programmed
that in assembly and machine mostly.

The hardest thing about C is perhaps dealing with all of the pointer issues
- but at the same time that is where a lot of its power lies.

Some of us have even programmed in machine language once upon a time, but
that doesn't mean I am going to throw my efficient C Compiler out the window
because I want to program in machine language.

As mentioned earlier, I think this is an interesting exercise from a
computer science point of view - no telling where it could lead you.
Nothing ventured, nothing gained --- but simple suggestion - learn some C -
pick up K&R.

Regards,
John Westmoreland
http://www.WestmorelandEngineering.com

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 6:19 AM, cro83 wrote:

> There could be one in Basic, C/C++, LabView, Pascal, Python, etc., etc.
>
> The power of the msp430 is that an engineer, or even a technician such as
> myself, can learn to use an MCU in only a few hours of training with the
> module. Even though I had never used Microprocessors in any of my designs
> before, I was able to implement the MSP430 with few problems. Of course I
> would have gotten nowhere without the example code provided by TI and I
> still base my designs around that code. One issue I had, was that I was
> familier with Visual Basic, but not C++, so there was another short learning
> curve to turn. I could have finished my design two or three days earlier
> with a VB compiler.
>
> Using LabView for MSP430 compiling would be a tremendous boost to the
> number of people able to use the microprocessor. This would allow
> technicians with almost no software knowledege to be able to troubleshoot
> software related issues and design workarounds and upgrades to existing
> firmware.
>
> Frankly I am suprised that some of the software geniuses out there haven't
> already written compilers just for the challenge.
>
> Make no mistake, I would not pay a lot of money for it because, if a person
> is at all familiar with just about any software, that person should be able
> to quickly pick up C and C++, but it would be useful for those people that
> don't use microprocessors because they think it is too much to have to
> learn.
>
> Just my thoughts. . . .
> --- In m... , "Stephan
> Portier" wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I wanted to ask users for something. Is there any interest in a basic
> > compiler for msp430 series?
> >
> > I want to write a basic or Pascal compiler for this chip and wanted to
> know
> > if users really have interest or no.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Using LabVIEW to generate MSP430 code is one thing. Using MSP430 to do what LabVIEW does is quite different.

Earlier on, others were talking about graphic language. They were not talking about using MSP430 to do graphics either.

--- In m..., "Boyd, David" wrote:
>
> Wow... LabVIEW targeted to run on an MSP430. Now that's quite a tall
> order. But they've managed to target ADI BlackFin, some FPGA devices
> they sell, etc., so I wouldn't rule anything out J
>
>
>
> But there are so many features that mainstream LabVIEW developers take
> for granted that would be either left behind (or severely stripped down)
> to target an MSP430; TCP/UDP, serial, IEEE-488, floating-point math are
> just the few that spring to mind.
>
>
>
> But it's good to have dreams, eh?
>
>
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> David J. Boyd
>
> Senior Test Engineer
>
> Home Respiratory Care
>
> Home Healthcare Solutions
>
> Philips Healthcare
>
> 175 Chastain Meadows Court NW
>
> Kennesaw GA USA 30144-3724
>
> Office: 770-429-2809
>
> david.boyd@...
>
>
>
> From: m... [mailto:m...] On Behalf
> Of cro83
> Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 09:20
> To: m...
> Subject: [msp430] Re: Basic compiler for MSP430
>
>
>
>
>
> There could be one in Basic, C/C++, LabView, Pascal, Python, etc., etc.
>
> The power of the msp430 is that an engineer, or even a technician such
> as myself, can learn to use an MCU in only a few hours of training with
> the module. Even though I had never used Microprocessors in any of my
> designs before, I was able to implement the MSP430 with few problems. Of
> course I would have gotten nowhere without the example code provided by
> TI and I still base my designs around that code. One issue I had, was
> that I was familier with Visual Basic, but not C++, so there was another
> short learning curve to turn. I could have finished my design two or
> three days earlier with a VB compiler.
>
> Using LabView for MSP430 compiling would be a tremendous boost to the
> number of people able to use the microprocessor. This would allow
> technicians with almost no software knowledege to be able to
> troubleshoot software related issues and design workarounds and upgrades
> to existing firmware.
>
> Frankly I am suprised that some of the software geniuses out there
> haven't already written compilers just for the challenge.
>
> Make no mistake, I would not pay a lot of money for it because, if a
> person is at all familiar with just about any software, that person
> should be able to quickly pick up C and C++, but it would be useful for
> those people that don't use microprocessors because they think it is too
> much to have to learn.
>
> Just my thoughts. . . .
>
> --- In m... ,
> "Stephan Portier" wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I wanted to ask users for something. Is there any interest in a basic
> > compiler for msp430 series?
> >
> > I want to write a basic or Pascal compiler for this chip and wanted to
> know
> > if users really have interest or no.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =======================================================================> The information contained in this message may be confidential and legally protected under applicable law. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, forwarding, dissemination, or reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
>
>

Wow... LabVIEW targeted to run on an MSP430. Now that's quite a tall
order. But they've managed to target ADI BlackFin, some FPGA devices
they sell, etc., so I wouldn't rule anything out J

But there are so many features that mainstream LabVIEW developers take
for granted that would be either left behind (or severely stripped down)
to target an MSP430; TCP/UDP, serial, IEEE-488, floating-point math are
just the few that spring to mind.

But it's good to have dreams, eh?

Dave

David J. Boyd

Senior Test Engineer

Home Respiratory Care

Home Healthcare Solutions

Philips Healthcare

175 Chastain Meadows Court NW

Kennesaw GA USA 30144-3724

Office: 770-429-2809

d...@philips.com

From: m... [mailto:m...] On Behalf
Of cro83
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 09:20
To: m...
Subject: [msp430] Re: Basic compiler for MSP430

There could be one in Basic, C/C++, LabView, Pascal, Python, etc., etc.

The power of the msp430 is that an engineer, or even a technician such
as myself, can learn to use an MCU in only a few hours of training with
the module. Even though I had never used Microprocessors in any of my
designs before, I was able to implement the MSP430 with few problems. Of
course I would have gotten nowhere without the example code provided by
TI and I still base my designs around that code. One issue I had, was
that I was familier with Visual Basic, but not C++, so there was another
short learning curve to turn. I could have finished my design two or
three days earlier with a VB compiler.

Using LabView for MSP430 compiling would be a tremendous boost to the
number of people able to use the microprocessor. This would allow
technicians with almost no software knowledege to be able to
troubleshoot software related issues and design workarounds and upgrades
to existing firmware.

Frankly I am suprised that some of the software geniuses out there
haven't already written compilers just for the challenge.

Make no mistake, I would not pay a lot of money for it because, if a
person is at all familiar with just about any software, that person
should be able to quickly pick up C and C++, but it would be useful for
those people that don't use microprocessors because they think it is too
much to have to learn.

Just my thoughts. . . .

--- In m... ,
"Stephan Portier" wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I wanted to ask users for something. Is there any interest in a basic
> compiler for msp430 series?
>
> I want to write a basic or Pascal compiler for this chip and wanted to
know
> if users really have interest or no.
>
> Regards
>
>
>

=======================================================================The information contained in this message may be confidential and legally protected under applicable law. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, forwarding, dissemination, or reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.

There could be one in Basic, C/C++, LabView, Pascal, Python, etc., etc.

The power of the msp430 is that an engineer, or even a technician such as myself, can learn to use an MCU in only a few hours of training with the module. Even though I had never used Microprocessors in any of my designs before, I was able to implement the MSP430 with few problems. Of course I would have gotten nowhere without the example code provided by TI and I still base my designs around that code. One issue I had, was that I was familier with Visual Basic, but not C++, so there was another short learning curve to turn. I could have finished my design two or three days earlier with a VB compiler.

Using LabView for MSP430 compiling would be a tremendous boost to the number of people able to use the microprocessor. This would allow technicians with almost no software knowledege to be able to troubleshoot software related issues and design workarounds and upgrades to existing firmware.

Frankly I am suprised that some of the software geniuses out there haven't already written compilers just for the challenge.

Make no mistake, I would not pay a lot of money for it because, if a person is at all familiar with just about any software, that person should be able to quickly pick up C and C++, but it would be useful for those people that don't use microprocessors because they think it is too much to have to learn.

Just my thoughts. . . .

--- In m..., "Stephan Portier" wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I wanted to ask users for something. Is there any interest in a basic
> compiler for msp430 series?
>
> I want to write a basic or Pascal compiler for this chip and wanted to know
> if users really have interest or no.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
>

On 24/02/2010 00:48, r...@usbmicro.com wrote:
>
>> I used to like Microsoft's Macro-80 assembler for the TRS-80, there was
>> a CP/M version as well which I bought subsequently. I've got a feeling
>> that they didn't write it themselves, it was too good.
>
> Ha! *snort*
>
> I used this z80 basic/macro program a lot and I think I only utilized
> half of what it could do. IIRC you could use the macro language to
> manipulate 8/16/32 bits. Also single bit functions. I used the
> for/next and other constructs a lot. I think there was a limit on the
> depth that you could nest them, like 8 or so. It actually taught me
> structured programming - somewhat. I had to at least plan...
>
> I remember it was easy to make a subroutine that passed parameters, so
> I made a lot more subroutines because of that. And reading data out of
> an array (therefore incrementing pointers) was so easy that my code
> there never had bugs.
>
> If I had to do a lot of assembly programming for the msp430 I would
> love to use a smart assembler like this.

The m4 macro-processor is very powerful. You could write m4 macros and
pass your code through that.

Leon
--
Leon Heller
G1HSM

> I used to like Microsoft's Macro-80 assembler for the TRS-80, there was
> a CP/M version as well which I bought subsequently. I've got a feeling
> that they didn't write it themselves, it was too good.

Ha! *snort*

I used this z80 basic/macro program a lot and I think I only utilized
half of what it could do. IIRC you could use the macro language to
manipulate 8/16/32 bits. Also single bit functions. I used the
for/next and other constructs a lot. I think there was a limit on the
depth that you could nest them, like 8 or so. It actually taught me
structured programming - somewhat. I had to at least plan...

I remember it was easy to make a subroutine that passed parameters, so
I made a lot more subroutines because of that. And reading data out of
an array (therefore incrementing pointers) was so easy that my code
there never had bugs.

If I had to do a lot of assembly programming for the msp430 I would
love to use a smart assembler like this.

(Ah, the good old days.)

-Rob

On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 00:22:37 -0000, wrote:

> Something like this might have a lot more appeal than BASIC or C
> specifically for the msp430.

The only thing I would suggest is some way to remember which way is up
with the carry bit, and a way to assist in remembering what f'ing
condition codes mean.

I always remember carry this way: Carry Clear means Less Than on 6502 (as
that's the first assembly language I learned, and didn't have an assembler
code typed hex codes in by hand on a PET). Comes in handy on an ARM (it's
really cute, consider ADC and SBC and the difference between them with
this interpretation of carry). On everything else I've come across, Carry
Set means Greater Than Or Equal To.

Question: Am I mad? How does anybody else remember what Carry Set/Clear
means on their processor?

Perhaps MIPS had it right: no flags hence no need to worry about carry.

--
Paul Curtis, Rowley Associates Ltd http://www.rowley.co.uk
CrossWorks V2 is out for LPC1700, LPC3100, LPC3200, SAM9, and more!

On 24/02/2010 00:22, r...@usbmicro.com wrote:
> Hello Stephan,
>
>> Very harsh reallity.
>
>> I prefer to surrender right now. Its not worth to spend nights of work on a
>> useless project.
>
> Here is what you should do, if it was up to me to decide what you
> should do with your time. :-)
>
> I used an assembler for the z80 once that was 'augmented' for lack of
> a better term. It was a macro assembler that had some nice macro
> functions to it.
>
> It still let you write plain assembly language code: (I'm making up a
> little syntax here)
>
> Load A, 15
> Mov A, PortB
>
> But it also let you write loops that translated into assembly: (I
> don't remember the exact syntax.)
>
> DB loopy
>
> For loopy = 1 to 100
>
> Load A, loopy
> Mov A, PortB
>
> Next loopy
>
> A register was pushed/popped to support the macro.
>
> It had string functions and other "high level" constructs that would
> assist in writing assembly. It was an assembly/BASIC mix. I can't tell
> you how easy it became to write a lot of assembly. The output of this
> actually fed into a 'regular' assembler. This was all DOS-based, mind
> you, because it was about a hundred years ago when I wrote z80 code
> for money. My DOS text editor shelled out to run a batch file that
> called both the macro converter and assembler.
>
> Something like this might have a lot more appeal than BASIC or C
> specifically for the msp430.

I used to like Microsoft's Macro-80 assembler for the TRS-80, there was
a CP/M version as well which I bought subsequently. I've got a feeling
that they didn't write it themselves, it was too good. I wrote a
cross-assembler for the TI 9995 chip using M-80 macros because we
couldn't afford the official TI development software. It only took me a
couple of days.

Leon
--
Leon Heller
G1HSM

Hello Stephan,

> Very harsh reallity.

> I prefer to surrender right now. Its not worth to spend nights of work on a
> useless project.

Here is what you should do, if it was up to me to decide what you
should do with your time. :-)

I used an assembler for the z80 once that was 'augmented' for lack of
a better term. It was a macro assembler that had some nice macro
functions to it.

It still let you write plain assembly language code: (I'm making up a
little syntax here)

Load A, 15
Mov A, PortB

But it also let you write loops that translated into assembly: (I
don't remember the exact syntax.)

DB loopy

For loopy = 1 to 100

Load A, loopy
Mov A, PortB

Next loopy

A register was pushed/popped to support the macro.

It had string functions and other "high level" constructs that would
assist in writing assembly. It was an assembly/BASIC mix. I can't tell
you how easy it became to write a lot of assembly. The output of this
actually fed into a 'regular' assembler. This was all DOS-based, mind
you, because it was about a hundred years ago when I wrote z80 code
for money. My DOS text editor shelled out to run a batch file that
called both the macro converter and assembler.

Something like this might have a lot more appeal than BASIC or C
specifically for the msp430.

-Rob