| ??? 02/08/06 16:46 Read: times |
#109526 - match Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Yep I know that stack thingy as I did some minor PIC16F84 projects like 5 years ago (and I hate PICs since then - so my nightmare would be a PIC project using C :-) just I thought they already solved it. I have heard the 18F series copes with the bottlenecks of the 16-series - did they already implement a proper stack on the 18s?
The LPC934+ migh be a match but the '51s never managed to get so low with the power consumption (especally at low clocks), this is the only reason we used the PICs several times... Jan Waclawek |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| What is like a PIC16F877 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Link. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| stupid magazine .. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| be realistic, guys | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Really advantageous? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| an answer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| multi-chip option | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| that would require | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I had a look into PIC16F87x datasheet | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sounds a lot like a LPC93x | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| match | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| That is one of the toughest changeover | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yes It does | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| What I use... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Because | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Internal ADC uses | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| DSPIC | 01/01/70 00:00 |