|
LDmicro Forum - Sponsorship |
|||
|
|
|
(you are viewing a thread; or go back to list of threads)
Sponsorship (by Tom J.)
I wrote to [email protected] a while back regarding the possibility of sponsorship the inclusion of PIC12F509 and PIC12F508 and got no response, is that a "no"?
(no subject) (by José GILLES)
Hi
Ihor, the main developper, seems to be far away from ldmicro for the time being... What would you do with such little pics ? Only use input / ouput pins ? There don't seem to be any peripheral on these PICs, only a timer/counter 0, which must be dedicated to cycle timing. Let us know a bit more. JG
Sponsorship (by John Devito)
I too am looking to sponsor a additional micro the 16f1527
(no subject) (by Tom J.)
I feel the 12F508 / 9 would be useful for hobbyist applications mainly. But for making small timers, latch switches, ect they would shine because they cost very little and are very tiny in comparison to the other MCUs we can program in LDMicro with the exception of 10F200 but the 10F200 doesn't have enough program memory to be truly useful.
(no subject) (by Ziggy)
The best way to "sponsor" a particular chip is to provide Ihor with the relevant proteus libraries so that he can in the very least simulate the workings of the micro.
otherwise provide him with development hardware as he specifies it. This would be a bare minimum sponsorship.
(no subject) (by José GILLES)
Pic16f1527 is much more complex and can't be added in the twinkling of an eye...
Explain at least: - why you need this PIC especially ? - why you can't do with existing ones ? Best regards JG
(no subject) (by MGP)
José it seems that Ihor already has done the job but I agree its a lot of work.
Sponsoring = compensation for the work. I am satisfied with the already supported (pic)controllers, I am looking forward to more typical PLC instructions so that the language becomes more powerful but I am not complaining, I am very satisfied. The best upgrade was the introduction of #0x... so we can write directly in the registers.
(no subject) (by Tom J.)
I'm not complaining, LdMicro is an incredibly powerful tool and I'm thankful to everyone who has made it and this community possible.
What I'm seeing is that we just don't have a simple PIC, in order to do simple things we have to waste a large MCU and only use a fraction of it. The addition of PIC12F509 gives us the equivalent of a small car with which to fetch groceries so we don't have to drive the scool bus.
(no subject) (by MGP)
A PIC12F509 is a toy car, a 12F683 is a real car ;-)
PWM, ADC, 3.5kb flash, 3 timers, 8Mhz intern osc. 1,5K flash is not enough to use with LDmicro. A 16F88 is a school bus, my favourite
(no subject) (by john)
José GILLES
i dont need to explain why um i need more I/O than the 35 the 877 has to offer
(no subject) (by Tom J.)
I just looked up 12F683 and that is a really cool MCU with twice the program memory of the 12F509 and 4 times the 12F508. Still, a small PIC would be useful for small jobs.
(no subject) (by Tom J.)
The 12F683 costs almost twice as much as the 12F509 but it's still only $1.20 USD -vs- 12F509 which is $.70 USD.
That said the cost effectiveness could go either way since 12F683 is considerably more capable. Regardless I still maintain that a PIC12 would be a useful addition to the arsenal and would like to discuss a sponsorship to get the PIC12 family included in the LDMicro family.
(no subject) (by Tom J.)
BUMP !!
Any interest in this? I'd still like to persue sponsoring a PIC12 endeavor.
(no subject) (by Tom J.)
Anyone finding this thread later, PIC12F683 was added to the supported list for V5.3.0.4.
http://cq.cx/ladder-forum.pl?a...;parent=8434&tt=1555543813
Post a reply to this comment:
|
|
|