Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: rbowman Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: Russian Attack Drones Using UK CPUs Date: 8 Oct 2025 16:41:01 GMT Lines: 21 Message-ID: References: <10c58c9$1fgv6$4@dont-email.me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net 2l0DjZ8Y1Xs7sYH1AW6GkQRqCrscyFg2z8iFetSU33hucWCqlg Cancel-Lock: sha1:m0BQzFGwkl8x+iomWgOArOZ0vvU= sha256:GGVzDgvGXA5w0saMymLcBapAYEJGW/Vf46R7eUG0GoA= User-Agent: Pan/0.162 (Pokrosvk) Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:75805 On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 09:46:01 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > I tend to agree. I always found arduinos to be expensive, and now RP2040 > et al are way cheaper, one wonders what ATMEL is worth any more. Perhaps > what Arduino is, is not so much the hardware, as the expertise in tool > chains, development platforms and the like. The UNO R4 uses the Renesas RA4MI, a Cortex-M4 processor. It isn't your grandfather's UNO. The new UNO Q definitely ain't. The toolchains ans IDEs are a plus. https://arduino-pico.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ There are times when the Pico C++ SDK is necessary but it isn't much fun. Either MicroPython or Arduino Core is more straight forward. From the docs on the UNO Q they are also using Arduino Core/Zephyr RTOS for the STM32. The ST C++ SDK is another one that's not much fun. It's the classic trade off. If you don't need balls to the wall runtime performance faster development time wins.