I bought a scope too. You can never have too many.

The picaxe was the go-to education microcontroller before the arduinos became cheaper and smaller and currently the BBCMicrobit is the favourite but there are several other very small simple equivalents. These cover the under 14s doing a cheap intro project in maker clubs or classes where half the pupils aren’t really interested. The tech equivalent of making some rock cakes in a domestic science class. Some 15 years ago my nephew used a picaxe to make a timer at school but did not develop any interest in electronics.

At its list price probably not but for a fiver…

Actually I thought Dave was being quite gentle Michael.  🙂

I don’t view the ‘multiple’ Basics as a problem. I regard the PicoMite as a complete solutions package, one that gives me easy access to the Pico (these days the RP2350 -Pico2) that happens to use Basic. Although I have used other Basics, that was many years ago.  The only Basic I use these days is MMB, so it’s not a problem in practice. As I think you may be discovering, MMB is very closely bound to the hardware platform being used and that is very helpful as it’s been tested for that specific platform.

Apart from the postage, the PCB scope has cost less than a pint in my local and so I will have a play and see what use it might be to me. I knew it wasn’t fast but then not everything I do needs ‘fast’.

Regards,

IanT

Everyone has their favorite tools Robert and it makes good sense to use what you know and like. I certainly have my personal preferences for the CAD, CAM, O/S and embedded systems I use.

However, just to comment on “Compiled”.

There does seem to be a general perception that “Compilers” will always out perform “Interpreters” and this is true (in “speed” terms) when using ‘like-for-like’ hardware platforms (or a very similarly spec’ed one).

But it is certainly not true when comparing (benchmarking) a compiled programme versus an interpreted one on very different underlying H/W platforms. It might suprise some that an RP2350 Picomite (running MM Basic – an interpreted language) will normally easily outperform many popular (but older) embedded systems, such as the Arduino Uno, Nano or Due (or the ME Labs PIC18F47K40 based ‘D’ stick) even if they are running compiled code. Many of these other systems are based on modern 8 (or 16) bit architectures and are simply outgunned by the Pico 2’s (32 bit) ARM Cortex 33 twin CPUs in raw performance – compiled or not.

Of course running a compiled language on the Pico2 would be faster (than MMB) but perhaps not as simple to use & debug. There are considerations other than just raw ‘speed’ such as ease of learning, programming and (most especially) debugging.

If you haven’t looked at MMB, I’d be interested to hear how it compares with PBP from your (developers) point of view. Both are now about the same ‘maturity’ after some 15 years of software development.

Regards,

IanT

I agree Robert – but a comparison between Apples and Pears does often happen.

My point was (is) that many people assume that “Basic” (normally an Interpreted language) is always going to be ‘slower’ (e.g. provide less performance) than other systems that run a compiled language. They miss the fact that this is not neccessarily so. It depends on the underlying hardware and how well the ‘Interpreter’ has been designed vs the ‘Compiler’. Nor does it factor in considerations such as ease of use.

I was a amused by your comparison with engine sizes. Last year I had the dubious pleasure of driving a V8 4.8 litre ‘Hemi’ and my own (4-cylnder) 2.0 litre car is not only faster but also manages to go around corners without scaring the hell out of me. But then the V8 does weigh half a ton more, most of that being at the front end it seemed!

A good example of why ‘power’ is not the only metric, as it also has to be usable.

Regards,

IanT

I’ve just received mine this afternoon John.

Haven’t done anything to it yet but will be using it with a protoboard as shown below most likely. So I’ll be designing something that will protect it in this configuation. You would be welcome to the STL(s) should you wish them..

Regards,

IanT