RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: PICs as replacements for L297s

Paul:

Is it ONLY fifteen years ago that the Intel 8085 was top dog?

I did much the same thing for the company that I worked for, but only with
the 8080. Interesting thing is that the best "student" of the bunch was a
lawyer from the patent department. He knew nothing about electronics and
less about programming, but asked enough questions that most of the others
were afraid to ask and turned in one of the best projects that I had seen. I
can't discuss the project, though, because attached to it was the most
stringent nondisclosure letter I have ever read. :) Have you added "mental
gymnast" to your resume?

I've never really worked with the PIC's either. One question I have is that,
if you stayed within a manufacturer's offerings, would you find that the
later devices built on the earlier devices hardware and software
characteristics so that you would not have to continually start from ground
zero whenever your current "favorite" was superceded?

-- Carol & Jerry Jankura
Strongsville, Ohio
So many toys, so little time



-----Original Message-----
From: paul@... [mailto:paul@...]
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2001 6:05 AM
To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: PICs as replacements for L297s


Many moons ago (15 years) I used to run very short courses on the use
of the Intel 8085 system development kit. (TALK ABOUT THE BLIND
LEADING THE BLIND.) I used to have 10 trainees writing code for a
simple project - like a traffic signal sequence - and have them enter
it on the kit to see if it worked. Sometimes there would be 10
different reasons why the it would not work and they each required
help.
But I ENJOYED the mental gymnasics involved.
The purpose of this post is to ask, how different is progaming a PIC
to that which I described above?

Many thanks

Paul