Is it? The fair assumption is that one posting a query has (a) thoroughly read and understood the datasheet or made a specific inquiry about a definition, most of which would easily be resolved by a search, and (b) made some preliminary decisions about requirements, available development tools, programming methodology, etc.



If "EE people" are deciding whether to switch away from 805x core chips, they should be visiting the sites that they think will provide them with the information they need. Which 805x-core MCU would you consider capable of "Mbit++" serial communication, aside from the ones specifically intended for Ethernet? Erik Malund seems to have concluded that 805x serial communication tops out at 480-something kbps.

That's one thing that's disturbed me about YOUR posts. You seem to think this is a general discussion forum for whatever you happen to want to discuss. For me, if I want to know about ARM or any other non-805x-core MCU, I go to a different site to discuss it. I certainly don't attempt to promote "BIG" processor cores here, nor do I advocate for "small" cores elsewhere.

I have advocated for integration of 805x soft-cores with specialized hardware, since programmable logic is a reasonable vehicle vehicle in which to do that, though only when no reasonably priced alternative presents itself. The reason, I feel, that this is a good path is that the 805x instruction set is so well adapted to microcontroller sorts of tasks.

As I've often said, microprocessors and microcontrollers were conceived as a replacement for lots of digital logic. The fact that they can behave as computers in the sense that comp-sci students are taught is purely incidental. It's important, but it's nice, though not necessary. That, of course, is not everyone's position, and I recognize that.

RE