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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #28906 > unrolled thread

Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth

Contents

  Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Matthias Koch <matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> - 2014-03-04 12:04 +0100
    Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Matthias Koch <matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> - 2014-03-26 15:57 +0100
      Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 00:55 -0400
        Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-04 23:04 -0700
          Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 04:16 -0400
            Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-05 12:52 -0700
              Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 19:39 -0400
                Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-05 18:27 -0700
                  Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 22:28 -0400
                    Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-05 20:25 -0700
                      Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-04-06 00:37 -0400
                        Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-05 22:59 -0700
                          Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-04-06 03:08 -0400
                            Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-07 19:26 -0700
                              Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-04-08 00:13 -0400
                                Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-07 21:41 -0700
                              Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-04-08 02:20 -0700
                                Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-08 05:59 -0700
                                  Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-04-09 00:41 -0400
          Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-04-08 02:24 -0700
            Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-08 06:15 -0700
              Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-04-08 06:46 -0700
              Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Matthias Koch <matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> - 2014-04-08 17:00 +0200
                Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-08 08:55 -0700
                  Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-04-09 00:50 -0700
        Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-04-05 10:37 -0700
        Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M Matthias Koch <matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> - 2014-04-08 13:09 +0200
          Re: Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-04-09 00:50 -0400

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#28906 — Announcing the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris for ARM Cortex M

I wish to announce the first stable release of Mecrisp-Stellaris,
a native code standalone embedded Forth running on ARM Cortex M0, M3 and M4.

Ready-to-fly targets:

- TI Stellaris Launchpad       with LM4F120H5QR (M4)
- STM VL Discovery             with STM32F100RB (M3)
- STM F4 Discovery             with STM32F407VGT6 (M4)
- Freescale Freedom FRDM-KL25Z with KL25Z128VLK4 (M0)

And, as a contribution:

- Chinese QF-LM4F232           with LM4F232H5QC (M4)

Feel free to try ! If you wish another chip to be in this list, contact me.
I would love to help you with porting.

Matthias Koch
http://mecrisp.sourceforge.net/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#29147

Time to add one more target:

TI Tiva Connected Launchpad with TM4C1294 (M4)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29291

On 3/26/2014 10:57 AM, Matthias Koch wrote:
> Time to add one more target:
>
> TI Tiva Connected Launchpad with TM4C1294 (M4)

Maybe I confuse easily, but I made the mistake of digging out my 
Stellaris Launchpad and trying to find docs on it.  Seems like TI had 
done a purge and there is nearly no trace of the Stellaris docs on their 
web site.  The Stellaris Launchpad comes with no docs of any sort other 
than the quick start flysheet.  I went online and found nothing at the 
TI site.  Digikey still has a promo page on this launchpad but the link 
to the TI user manual comes up as invalid on the TI site.

I would like to find some time to play with Mecrisp on this board, but I 
don't want to go into it blind.  In fact, I find the whole conversion 
from Stellaris to Tiva to be a bit obfuscated.

Ok, while digging for the info I was going to quote here, I found a user 
manual for the Launchpad.  I guess the Digikey link was broken because 
they changed the file name when they updated the rev.  :P

Still I find the conversion a bit confusing.  Did they just rename the 
Stellaris chips or are the Tiva C chip "equivalents" not exactly the 
same devices?  It looks like the Launchpad is not exactly the same.  But 
they might not be using the same chip on the Tiva version.  It looks 
like they have upgraded it to the Stellaris LM4F230H5QR / Tiva 
TM4C123GH6PM.  So the two boards are different for sure.  But the Tiva 
board you list is yet another one...  ahh, looks like this one has 
Ethernet.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29292

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> Maybe I confuse easily, but I made the mistake of digging out my
> Stellaris Launchpad and trying to find docs on it. 

I can't tell whether Tiva is just the new name for Stellaris, or
if the chips are actually different.  In any case, searching "Stellaris
Launchpad" finds lots of info.

I also notice there is a new high end MSP430 Launchpad!  It costs $29.99
which is outside of traditional Launchpad pricing, but it has 2k of
sram, 64k of FRAM, and an LCD display (96*96, 1.3" dia) booster pack.
This would be an awesome Forth target because of the FRAM.

> Ok, while digging for the info I was going to quote here, I found a
> user manual for the Launchpad. 

Got a url?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29295

On 4/5/2014 2:04 AM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> Maybe I confuse easily, but I made the mistake of digging out my
>> Stellaris Launchpad and trying to find docs on it.
>
> I can't tell whether Tiva is just the new name for Stellaris, or
> if the chips are actually different.  In any case, searching "Stellaris
> Launchpad" finds lots of info.

That is also my problem.  TI seems to just want to duck the whole issue 
and get you over to the Tiva parts without any acknowledgement the 
Stellaris parts ever existed.  I believe the parts that have a part 
number mapping are the same part.  The one on the Stellaris Launchpad 
maps to a Tiva part and the web page for that has all docs referring to 
Tiva... except for the errata which is still uses the old Stellaris part 
number.  So I figure that one *has* to be the same part, lol.

When I search I didn't find so much, but then you didn't find the user 
manual, so I'm not sure what it was that you *did* find.  I found a 
number of docs talking about the conversion to the new parts, but none 
really answered my questions.


> I also notice there is a new high end MSP430 Launchpad!  It costs $29.99
> which is outside of traditional Launchpad pricing, but it has 2k of
> sram, 64k of FRAM, and an LCD display (96*96, 1.3" dia) booster pack.
> This would be an awesome Forth target because of the FRAM.

While digging for the Launchpad in my various boxes, I found several 
eval boards with LCDs.  One is an old Cypress PSOC board with their 
proprietary 8 bit MCU.  Another is a Renesas RX62N board with all sorts 
of bells and whistles.  I even found an old Stellaris Luminary eval 
board with a teeny tiny 2 line OLED display that I used to make a Sudoku 
puzzle.  Then finally I found a not quite so old Kinetis Kwik Stik which 
has an ARM CM4 processor at 100 MHz.  I may need to do something with 
this one.


>> Ok, while digging for the info I was going to quote here, I found a
>> user manual for the Launchpad.
>
> Got a url?

http://www.ti.com/lit/ug/spmu289c/spmu289c.pdf

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29304

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> TI seems to just want to duck the whole issue and get you over to the
> Tiva parts without any acknowledgement the Stellaris parts ever
> existed.  I believe the parts that have a part number mapping are the
> same part.

Actually, there are some minor improvements in the Tiva version:

http://e2e.ti.com/group/universityprogram/educators/f/776/t/270596.aspx

Typing "tiva stellaris launchpad difference" into web search found
that page and a few others with more info.  The Tiva version supports
hardware PWM and USB On The Go, both of which are potentially handy.

Overall though I think these TI boards are less attractive than the
Freescale counterparts.  The Freedom M3 board has some cool peripherals
such as a compass/accelerometer built in, and the Freedom M4 has a
faster processor with more memory than TI's board.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29306

On 4/5/2014 3:52 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> TI seems to just want to duck the whole issue and get you over to the
>> Tiva parts without any acknowledgement the Stellaris parts ever
>> existed.  I believe the parts that have a part number mapping are the
>> same part.
>
> Actually, there are some minor improvements in the Tiva version:
>
> http://e2e.ti.com/group/universityprogram/educators/f/776/t/270596.aspx
>
> Typing "tiva stellaris launchpad difference" into web search found
> that page and a few others with more info.  The Tiva version supports
> hardware PWM and USB On The Go, both of which are potentially handy.
>
> Overall though I think these TI boards are less attractive than the
> Freescale counterparts.  The Freedom M3 board has some cool peripherals
> such as a compass/accelerometer built in, and the Freedom M4 has a
> faster processor with more memory than TI's board.

You are talking about the launchpad eval board.  I was referring to the 
MCU devices that TI say are equivalent.  I can't be sure they are the 
same part, but I'm pretty confident.

In my earlier post I pointed out that the Tiva launchpad does not use 
the same part as the Stellaris launchpad, even ignoring the different 
part numbers used.  The two parts are not claimed to be the same.  But 
they are clearly very similar and appear to be upward compatible.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29307

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> You are talking about the launchpad eval board.  I was referring to
> the MCU devices that TI say are equivalent.  I can't be sure they are
> the same part, but I'm pretty confident.

I remember seeing something claiming that the Teva version had some
errata fixed, but don't remember the specifics.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29310

On 4/5/2014 9:27 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> You are talking about the launchpad eval board.  I was referring to
>> the MCU devices that TI say are equivalent.  I can't be sure they are
>> the same part, but I'm pretty confident.
>
> I remember seeing something claiming that the Teva version had some
> errata fixed, but don't remember the specifics.

In the line you posted I did see a claim that the Stellaris chips were 
pre-production devices and the Tiva part numbers are production... which 
would imply there could have been changes in the silicon revs.  But I 
find it very odd that they would release eval kits with pre-production 
devices.

Whatever...  This TI naming nonsense is all too messy for me to worry 
with further.  If I get some time I will try downloading Mecrisp to the 
Stellaris eval board since this is a match with a tested version.  Then 
I may spend a little time porting Mecrisp to the Kinetis KwikStik I 
have.  I think I have a couple of them actually.  But I can only find 
one at the moment.  It seems like a capable little board with a decent 
processor and a 37x8 dot matrix LCD.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29313

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> Then I may spend a little time porting Mecrisp to the Kinetis KwikStik
> I have....  It seems like a capable little board with a decent
> processor and a 37x8 dot matrix LCD.

Found it on element14.com.  It does look like a nice little board,
something like a SIMM form factor with an LCD and various other
peripherals:

http://www.element14.com/community/docs/DOC-37749/l/f#anchor5
http://www.freescale.com/kwikstik

It's $35 at element14 if anyone cares.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29314

On 4/5/2014 11:25 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> Then I may spend a little time porting Mecrisp to the Kinetis KwikStik
>> I have....  It seems like a capable little board with a decent
>> processor and a 37x8 dot matrix LCD.
>
> Found it on element14.com.  It does look like a nice little board,
> something like a SIMM form factor with an LCD and various other
> peripherals:
>
> http://www.element14.com/community/docs/DOC-37749/l/f#anchor5
> http://www.freescale.com/kwikstik
>
> It's $35 at element14 if anyone cares.

A *large* SIMM.  That's one thing I like about it.  The LCD is about 3 
inches across although it is not all dot matrix.  They have some 
dedicated icons along the sides that take up some real estate.  Still, 
the info shown should be very readable even to old myopic eyes like 
mine.  It doesn't have a lot of other features though.  These boards are 
always about the features of the MCU they wish to promote.  This one 
apparently is all about the LCD drive capability.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29315

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> A *large* SIMM.  That's one thing I like about it.  The LCD is about 3
> inches across although it is not all dot matrix.  

Yeah, it seems nice for various kinds of little boxes and panel mount
things needing displays.  I notice it has capacitive sensors instead of
pushbuttons -- is that much of a hassle if you want to mount the board
in an enclosure?  It looks like it comes with some kind of plastic
shell--is that ok?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29316

On 4/6/2014 1:59 AM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> A *large* SIMM.  That's one thing I like about it.  The LCD is about 3
>> inches across although it is not all dot matrix.
>
> Yeah, it seems nice for various kinds of little boxes and panel mount
> things needing displays.  I notice it has capacitive sensors instead of
> pushbuttons -- is that much of a hassle if you want to mount the board
> in an enclosure?  It looks like it comes with some kind of plastic
> shell--is that ok?

I assume that the capacitive buttons can be operated through the cover. 
  It is fairly thin silicon rubber, the flexible stuff and can easily be 
removed.  I would give it a try, but I really need to deal with some 
problems I've been stuck on for a while.

I don't have much experience with networking and I can't get a telnet 
loopback connection to work on my Windows 8 machine.  I use a telnet 
client as a display for the serial comms traffic to/from a test fixture. 
  I guess I could just turn that off, but I really don't want to mess 
with the code to add a switch.  The display is very useful when there is 
a problem... just not when there is a problem with the display.  lol

Very strange.  My firewall reports that it is passing the messages for 
IP 127.0.0.1 both from Win32Forth and from the Telnet client, but 
neither one sees the other.  With the advice of some folks in the 
C.A.Embedded group I used Wireshark to view the loopback, but it sees 
nothing... no messages at all.  But if you ping 127.0.0.1 it sees that! 
  Go figure.  I'm really stumped.  I'm going to try running it on a Win7 
netbook I have.  I know it worked under Vista and I think the machine 
they run it on the shop floor is Win7.  It also works ok under XP.  So 
what is different about Win8?  I'm ready to go to Win9, thanks. :(

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29414

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> I assume that the capacitive buttons can be operated through the
> cover. ...  I would give it a try, but I really need to deal with some
> problems I've been stuck on for a while.

Fair enough, and understandable.  Do you have any idea how much power
the board uses when its display is on but the cpu is essentially idle?
I'm wondering if it would be ok to use as a battery powered clock.  If a
pair of AA cells can run it for a few months that's sufficient for my
purposes.  Yes, the clock would have some special features ;-).  I know
that it has an RTC but that doesn't count-- I want it to actually be
displaying continuously.

> I don't have much experience with networking and I can't get a telnet
> loopback connection to work on my Windows 8 machine....  The display
> is very useful when there is a problem... 

Yeah, it's a good approach.  Others who have been advising you know much
more about Windows than I do, especially the issue that wireshark can't
monitor the loopback port.  Have you tried connecting to the machine's
actual IP address instead of 127.0.0.1?  Then you might be able to use
wireshark.  I think someone else mentioned you might be using an older
version of winsock.dll and maybe you could try a newer one.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29417

On 4/7/2014 10:26 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> I assume that the capacitive buttons can be operated through the
>> cover. ...  I would give it a try, but I really need to deal with some
>> problems I've been stuck on for a while.
>
> Fair enough, and understandable.  Do you have any idea how much power
> the board uses when its display is on but the cpu is essentially idle?
> I'm wondering if it would be ok to use as a battery powered clock.  If a
> pair of AA cells can run it for a few months that's sufficient for my
> purposes.  Yes, the clock would have some special features ;-).  I know
> that it has an RTC but that doesn't count-- I want it to actually be
> displaying continuously.

I don't know.  I would expect that if it could drive the LCD from the 
display controller while the CPU is stopped it would be prominently 
displayed in the data sheet prolog.  That is equivalent to running the 
RTC with the CPU stopped.  Run both and let the RTC wake up the CPU to 
change the display once a second, check for your "special" features and 
then drift off for a 1 second nap.


>> I don't have much experience with networking and I can't get a telnet
>> loopback connection to work on my Windows 8 machine....  The display
>> is very useful when there is a problem...
>
> Yeah, it's a good approach.  Others who have been advising you know much
> more about Windows than I do, especially the issue that wireshark can't
> monitor the loopback port.  Have you tried connecting to the machine's
> actual IP address instead of 127.0.0.1?  Then you might be able to use
> wireshark.  I think someone else mentioned you might be using an older
> version of winsock.dll and maybe you could try a newer one.

I have gotten a lot of help on this, but it is "stumping the chumps".  I 
have a couple of things I still need to try yet.  It was just yesterday 
that someone explained the Forth app seems to be willing to work on any 
IP address, it is just waiting for a message on port 23.  This is from 
the debug info that has been collected by the various tools.  So it 
seems very odd that it doesn't work.  I'll figure it out sooner or 
later.  I'll give your idea a try.  Even with my limited networking 
knowledge I think I can figure out how to do that.. :)

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29418

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> That is equivalent to running the RTC with the CPU stopped.  Run both
> and let the RTC wake up the CPU to change the display once a second,

Yeah, that is about what I had in mind.  

> It was just yesterday that someone explained the Forth app seems to be
> willing to work on any IP address, it is just waiting for a message on
> port 23.  This is from the debug info that has been collected by the
> various tools.  So it seems very odd that it doesn't work. 

I don't remember the exact netstat output but 0.0.0.0 means listen on
all interfaces.  You could also try changing the port number both on the
listener end and in the telnet client.  Or try connecting with some
other client (a web browser even) and see if the connection shows up
on the listener side.  I think someone already mentioned ncat, which
is worth trying.  Or if you have Python, try:

  import socket
  s = socket.socket()
  s.connect(('127.0.0.1', 23))

and see if you get an error message.  Note there are two layers of
parentheses in the last line.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29429

Paul,

Have you considered an eInk display? The eInk display is slow, but it only requires power to *update* the display, then you can physically power it down and the display remains unchanged. So, for a clock, you'd only need to power it up once a minute.

They *have* been successfully interfaced to the MSP430 and there seems to be plenty of information on it:

http://e2e.ti.com/group/launchyourdesign/m/msp430microcontrollerprojects/665466.aspx

HTH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29440

Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> writes:
> Have you considered an eInk display? The eInk display is slow, 

The nice thing about that qwikstik is that the cpu and display are on
the same board, all very convenient, no multiple boards to wire
together, and it's relatively cheap (the 2.7" e-ink is $37 all by
itself).  Also I think e-ink is nice but I thought it took quite a bit
of power to update.  That's ok for an e-reader where you do a few
hundred updates (page turns) per day, but not great for a clock that
updates once a second.  Still, it's good to know about--I didn't realize
that interface board had already been built.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29479

On 4/8/2014 8:59 AM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> writes:
>> Have you considered an eInk display? The eInk display is slow,
>
> The nice thing about that qwikstik is that the cpu and display are on
> the same board, all very convenient, no multiple boards to wire
> together, and it's relatively cheap (the 2.7" e-ink is $37 all by
> itself).  Also I think e-ink is nice but I thought it took quite a bit
> of power to update.  That's ok for an e-reader where you do a few
> hundred updates (page turns) per day, but not great for a clock that
> updates once a second.  Still, it's good to know about--I didn't realize
> that interface board had already been built.

You may find that the eInk displays on the TI modules are not suitable 
for a clock, even if it only updates once per minute.  I looked at them 
once and it was *very* hard to find good power consumption data because 
of the use case they imagine.  They figure you will be updating it once 
in a great while in a mode where you don't care about the power 
consumption.  Then the display keeps its state indefinitely with no 
power.  Sure, on the average that is low power.  But it depends on how 
often you update the display.

When I looked into these displays a year or so ago, the only info I 
could find indicated the power consumption while programming the display 
was on the order of a watt.  This was from companies that produce boards 
with a display on them.  I seem to recall they had some funky voltages 
and the operating currents were not light.

Of course, these are multiplexed, dot matrix displays.  There are also 
segment displays which can be much lower power.  eInk quotes power 
numbers based on the active area of the display which seem to be fairly 
low.  But I never found an off the shelf display suitable for a clock. 
That makes me think that these displays just aren't very workable for 
clock displays.  I'm not sure why no one likes the idea.  Even if it has 
to have wall power, I like the idea of having a paper like display 
rather than an illuminated display like LCD or LED, etc.  Maybe they 
figure clocks need to be seen in the dark, so why not stay with the 
status quo?

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29430

On Saturday, 5 April 2014 07:04:10 UTC+1, Paul Rubin  wrote:

> I also notice there is a new high end MSP430 Launchpad!  It costs $29.99
> which is outside of traditional Launchpad pricing, but it has 2k of
> sram, 64k of FRAM, and an LCD display (96*96, 1.3" dia) booster pack.
> This would be an awesome Forth target because of the FRAM.

Paul, do you have a link for this? I searched the TI site but no luck. TI's website is a bit of a nightmare to be honest.

TIA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth

csiph-web