Newsgroups: comp.robotics
Path: brunix!sgiblab!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!hpuerca.atl.hp.com!jab
From: jab@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Alan Barrow)
Subject: Re: 8051 and 87C751 etc
Message-ID: <C4s39F.n43@hpuerca.atl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1993 00:12:50 GMT
References: <1993Mar29.155202.106@wronz.org.nz>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard NARC Atlanta
Lines: 32

I have a robot built around an 80C31 using a Forth called Bryte Forth.

I like the 8051/8031 family, and like the forth implementation as well.

I used an A/D technology SIBEC board. This was before the hundreds of 
embedded micro boards became available.

I recently evaluated chips again, and decided to stick with the Intel
chips. They are very cheap, and I like my tools. The other chips I
considered did not offer enough advantages to switch. (Until I got into
the 16 bit range which was more expensive.)

I personally feel that CPU's with built in A/D are not as useful. There
never seem to be enough, or I need mode digital I/O. 

I offload my analog stuff into motion controller chips, so I like lots
of digital I/O lines, with good capability to access memory mapped I/O
as well.

The Bryte Forth environment shields me from the Intel architecture
oddities.

The capability to do bit I/O operations is very handy.

My thoughts, anyway.


 Alan Barrow  km4ba | I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack
 jab@atl.hp.com     | ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched
                    | C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
 ..!gatech!kd4nc!   | All those moments will be lost in time -
         km4ba!alan | like tears in rain. Time to die.          Roy Batty
