Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #51410

Re: blocks and overlays question

Show all headers | View raw

On 9/27/16 12:36 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes:
>>> with the ability to reclaim the ram using overlays, compiling from
>>> source sounds more attractive.
>> Much simpler and cleaner.
>
> I think this can even be ok even if it's compile-to-flash like with
> several of the existing MCU Forths.

Or, you can compile your common code to flash and run it there, and use 
a little RAM for the overlays. That would require resetting the 
dictionary pointer after the flash code is compiled, but shouldn't be 
complicated.

>>> How many block buffers did a usable block system actually need
>> Two is a minimum for decent operation. Beyond that, it really depends
>> on how much RAM you have and other issues. With flash, you want to
>> minimize writes.
>
> Good point--if the system is logging data or otherwise frequently
> updating flash pages, write wear is an issue.  If flash is only written
> occasionally (like when someone edits code and saves it) then it
> probably doesn't matter, if it's good for a few thousand cycles.  The
> chip also has a few bytes of NVRAM in case a measurement or two needs to
> be updated a lot and survive power cuts.

During development, put your kernel and well-tested code in flash and 
use RAM for testing. As the code becomes more stable, add it to the 
flashed code.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather   (US & Canada)   800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc.                         +1 310.999.6784
5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

blocks and overlays question Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-27 11:22 -0700
  Re: blocks and overlays question albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-09-27 20:51 +0200
    Re: blocks and overlays question Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-27 12:36 -0700
      Re: blocks and overlays question "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-27 10:16 -1000
        Re: blocks and overlays question Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-27 13:41 -0700
          Re: blocks and overlays question "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-27 11:36 -1000
            Re: blocks and overlays question Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-27 15:36 -0700
              Re: blocks and overlays question "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-27 13:33 -1000
                Re: blocks and overlays question Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-27 16:54 -0700
          Re: blocks and overlays question albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-09-28 09:44 +0200
  Re: blocks and overlays question hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-09-27 12:22 -0700
  Re: blocks and overlays question foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-09-27 12:51 -0700
    Re: blocks and overlays question Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-27 13:25 -0700
    Re: blocks and overlays question Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 03:37 -0700
      Re: blocks and overlays question foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-09-28 07:41 -0700
        Re: blocks and overlays question Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 15:05 -0700

csiph-web