Raspberry Pi Pico

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

This is [quite openly] a sponsored video but I think it’ ten minutes well spent:

.

.

.

 

MichaelG.

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 22/08/2023 07:19:40

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

[Ady1Participant @ady1]

All my bits and bobs have been sitting idle for a few years now as other things divert me

Clicking on google the biggest difference seems to be that instead of three for a tenner my little drawer full of nanos are 10 quid each nowadays. If you look overseas they are less than a buck a pop

You've got to watch out for fakes though, the mini pcb industry can be a bit of a capitalist wild west environment

If I was going to re-enter the market I would be looking at the RF wireless versions nowadays

The problem nowadays is there's far too much interesting stuff for a twiddler to twiddle with

Edited By Ady1 on 22/08/2023 10:04:30

[IanTParticipant @iant]

I watched this video with some interest Micheal and would agree that if you are already an Arduino IDE convert, then the Pico is a great platform. However, (as I may have mentioned previously) I gave up the Arduino IDE in preference to Micromite Basic (MMB) some time ago and I have never regretted it.

I've never been a 'professional' programmer (and now never will be). I'm self-taught and still learning, so I'm afraid I spend some time just trying to find my own mistakes. It's a great benefit to be able to quickly 'edit, run, edit, run again' and the ability to keep versions of code 'on-chip' (in flash-files) really speeds up this de-bugging process too. Add the fact that MMB is ported to the specific chip and directly supports it's avaialble hardware features 'in-language' (so usually no need for 'opaque' libraries – IR, IC2, PWM etc). MMB is also very well documented. The 'chip' specific manuals are typically 170+ pages, clearly written and actively updated by version release.

There are three versions of MMB for the Pico. A standard Picomite for embedded control (with LCD screeen support), a PicomiteVGA for applications that need VGA output and the Webmite which is a version of MMB for the Pico W. Details of all three can be found in the link below and I would suggest downloading the manual(s) to fully understand what a great solution the Picomite is for many embedded control applications.

Picomite Description and Downloads

So, if I seem somewhat evangelical about the Picomite, it's because I am. There are better known (e.g. publicised) 'micro' solutions but the Picomite is the best thing since sliced bread for programming numpties like myself.

Piocomite – a self-contained micro-system on a chip for £3-4. I urge folk to give it a look.

Regards,

IanT

[Ady1Participant @ady1]

If these things can be programmed by an individual to combine CNC and DRO type functions then all of our old kit can suddenly be automated and backlash issues almost eliminated

oh dear… even more interesting stuff for a twiddler…

Edited By Ady1 on 22/08/2023 11:08:11

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by IanT on 22/08/2023 10:51:53:

… However, (as I may have mentioned previously) I gave up the Arduino IDE in preference to Micromite Basic (MMB) some time ago and I have never regretted it.

I've never been a 'professional' programmer …

IanT

I was a professional programmer, paid to write in COBOL(s), FORTRAN(s), Filetab, C, C++, Sculptor, Perl, Informix-4GL, SQL, MS-BASIC, Visual-Basic, Pick-BASIC, and Delphi (Pascal-like). Also for my employer, I wrote reports on the applicability of Algol, Forth, BASIC, LISP, Pilot, Pascal, Python and Ada. Plus a comparison of the vices and virtues of the competing RDBMS of the day. Not only can I write BASIC, more than one variant, but I've had plenty of experience with other languages in all applications apart from real-time.

I'm afraid BASIC doesn't fare well in a professional programming environment. One difficulty is the large number of different versions of 'BASIC' – it's poorly standardised, leading to low portability and high re-training costs. There are many other irritants.

Early BASIC was narrowly focussed on allowing ordinary folk to interact with a computer, mainly to hint at possibilities. A simple language with no pretensions, the first BASIC was never intended to be more than a demonstrator. Unfortunately, its simplicity meant BASIC was fairly easy to implement on early 8 bit microcomputers, and it became popular in the hobby community, gradually adding many non-standard improvements.

BASIC's fluidity was no problem for singletons with home computers, but youngsters moved on to Computer Science courses, and started in IT Departments with their heads full of BASIC bad habits, that had to be painfully unlearned. Folk who had started with BASIC didn't make good use of the clarity provided by structured languages : they mangled Pascal by expressing logic in BASIC terms. And BASIC didn't support teams of developers. Meanwhile, computer languages had moved on, introducing features that BASICs haphazardly adopted later in non-standard ways. Although modern BASICs look respectable because they've adopted modern features like structured code and objects, BASIC is messy. BASIC's shortcomings turn nasty as programs grow in size and complexity. OK for small simple stuff. All big systems are hard to maintain, but big systems written in BASIC are extra tough. Trouble is most programs don't start out intending to become big and complex, but they often grow like Topsy as users ask for more features.

Today there's no call for BASIC in the world of jobs or academe. BASIC's main benefit is for hobbyists who started with on a ZX80 or BBC Micro, who want to do similar hobby programming on a microcontroller. Fair enough – it reduces the learning curve. But taking that short-cut ain't smart for anyone who wants to earn a living as a programmer, is serious about getting the best out of a microcontroller, or is starting a large project.

Under no circumstances should youngsters be encouraged to start by learning BASIC. In an IT job interview they will be asked to explain why they chose BASIC. They'd better have a good reason, and I don't believe there is one! Choosing BASIC means you don't understand the history, or why other languages are more suitable, or didn't question what their misinformed Elmer said. Being easy to learn is only one factor – grown-up programming needs much, much more. For example, BASIC is inferior to:

• Horrible old COBOL for Data Processing
• FORTRAN for Maths
• C/C++ for system, embedded and software tool programming
• Javascript & Java for web work
• C# for smart phones
• Python for general purpose computing

I see in the 2022 IEEE list of Top Programming Languages that only one BASIC is listed: Visual Basic is 29th between VHDL and Labview.

The only good reason for using BASIC today is you already know it and don't need better. Good choice for tinkerers who already have BASIC skills, bad choice as a starter language for everybody else.

Dave

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

The Pico is a bit overkill for many projects. It is a lot of processing power for the money. A lot of that is of course taken up to run Python. Making it simulate a Arduino needs a lot of third party software and seems a bit perverse to me. I certainly would not want to use it for anything critical. I must admit I'm a bit anti-Pi. I find the relationship between the charity, profit making company the mony they actually spend on charitable efforts, the niumber of directors and their relationships a bit troubling. As is the fact that their terms and conditions are business to business, i.e. no consumer protection.

I use "bare" Microchip PICs with a compled Basic. Pic Basic Pro http://www.pbp3.com which has a free version for personal use.

Robert.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Having never never seen the manufacturing line for the Pico, I was intrigued to see that RS offers them on a reel of 480 :

**LINK**

https://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/raspberry-pi/2122161?gb=b

MichaelG.

[TrickyParticipant @tricky]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 22/08/2023 12:54:16:

I was a professional programmer, paid to write in COBOL(s), FORTRAN(s), Filetab, C, C++, Sculptor, Perl, Informix-4GL, SQL, MS-BASIC, Visual-Basic, Pick-BASIC, and Delphi (Pascal-like). Also for my employer, I wrote reports on the applicability of Algol, Forth, BASIC, LISP, Pilot, Pascal, Python and Ada. Plus a comparison of the vices and virtues of the competing RDBMS of the day. Not only can I write BASIC, more than one variant, but I've had plenty of experience with other languages in all applications apart from real-time.

Oh dear Dave, you had a very limited experience of computer languages, no Coral 66, Pl/1 and its interactive subset CPS , IBM Assembler, APL and RPG.

Richard

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

My reason for posting the video was simply that the Pico , with its different I/O capabilities is now easily usable by those familiar with Arduino.

Haven’t explored it yet, but that seems a good move on somebody’s part.

MichaelG.

[duncan webster 1Participant @duncanwebster1]

As a completely self taught tinkerer I started with BBC Basic, which had some extra functionality like subroutines, then onto C, which is a lot more portable. I now use Python, which has all the functionality I'll ever want and loads of pre-written stuff you can download. My summary, Basic makes it easy to do simple stuff, but almost impossible to do complicated stuff, C makes it slightly more difficult to do simple stuff, but allows you to do really complicated stuff, Python is easier than C, and has all the functionality I'll ever need. It has built in routines for clever things like numerical solutions, which are quite useful for modelling valve gears, it even does Runge Kutta routines for solving differential equations. I used to understand those, but haven't used it for a long time. If I do I just call up a ready made routine. 

Edited By duncan webster on 22/08/2023 14:38:31

[IanTParticipant @iant]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 22/08/2023 12:54:16:

Posted by IanT on 22/08/2023 10:51:53:

… However, (as I may have mentioned previously) I gave up the Arduino IDE in preference to Micromite Basic (MMB) some time ago and I have never regretted it.

IanT

I'm afraid BASIC doesn't fare well in a professional programming environment. One difficulty is the large number of different versions of 'BASIC' – it's poorly standardised, leading to low portability and high re-training costs. There are many other irritants.

I don't disagree with you Dave but then I don't use different versions of Basic – just different ports of MM Basic (currently on PIC32, Pico, PicoVGA & DOS/Windows) and the underlying language syntax is all the same, the differences being in the hardware available on each platform.

Today there's no call for BASIC in the world of jobs or academe. BASIC's main benefit is for hobbyists who started with on a ZX80 or BBC Micro, who want to do {similar} hobby programming on a microcontroller. Fair enough – it reduces the learning curve. But taking that short-cut ain't smart for anyone who wants to earn a living as a programmer, is serious about getting the best out of a microcontroller, or is starting a large project.

Again true and you describe me (and my needs) fairly well. Being long retired, I am never going to work again (at least for money) let alone 'programme' for a living. I also assumed that many reading this Forum might be of a similar disposition. My 'compute' needs are generally simple and I don't have much time spare to get working solutions. That is why I've recommended the Picomite to others here. You can get results quickly and at a minimum cost in time and money.

Under no circumstances should youngsters be encouraged to start by learning BASIC.

I have built several PicomiteVGA systems and my Grandchildren are encouraged to use & play with them if they wish. I know enough to help them if required (which I wouldn't with other systems). I'd also view this as much better time spent than any of their current (iPad) addictions to World of Tanks, Minecraft and TikTok.

Both of my sons have excellent, well paid jobs in IT and neither have any programming skills that I'm aware of. I suspect that by the time my Grandchildren reach employable age, they won't need those skills either.

Robert A2. It may well be that the Pico is a bit of an overkill compared to simpler (and cheaper) 'PIC' chips but for £3 each (which is what I paid recently) it's not an issue in practice if I don't use all of the Pico's capabilities. I'm not building commercial systems to ship in volume. You can also install the Picomite just by dragging the UF2 file to it over USB (so no PIC programmer required). It is a fully functional system (so no need to buy extra PCBs, connectors or components) and there are a large range of Pico 'Accessories' available (that work equally well with a Picomite as with any other software). The Pico can also be purchased in smaller footprints (I have some "Zero's" from Waveshare that work well as Picomites).

So Picomite – quick and easy to use, powerful enough for most control applications, available (which has been very useful these past several years) and of course very affordable.

So I'll qualify my original recommendation – "the Picomite is the best thing since sliced bread for programming numpties like myself" – who do not intend to programme for a living, who don't work as part of a software team, who don't have any experience of programming 'PIC' chips and who have other (better) things they want to do with their spare time in addition to the odd bit of embedded controller work…

How's that, anyone else here fit that description?

Regards,

 

IanT

Edited By IanT on 22/08/2023 15:01:47

[IanTParticipant @iant]

PS Duncan

I have no idea what a "Runge Kutta" routine might be but the Picomite has a comprehensive range of built-in math functions covering Simple Arrays, Matrix, Vector and Quaternion arithmatic. You can use double precision floating point, 64-bit integers and string variables, arrays of floats, integers or strings with multiple dimensions as well as user defined subroutines and functions.

I'd like to be able to tell you that I know what half these things are for (Quaternion seems to be something to do with Fast Fourier Transforms) but frankly I've no real idea. All I can say is that these functions are there and ready to use (as described in the manual) should you wish to deploy them. I don't think most folk would find the Picomite lacking in it's ability to generate numbers.

Regards,

IanT

[Andy_HParticipant @andy_h]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 22/08/2023 12:54:16

One difficulty is the large number of different versions of 'BASIC' – it's poorly standardised, leading to low portability and high re-training costs.

Index, and HP RMB (Rocky Mountain Basic) was a wonderful environment for creating instrument control and analysis applications. Wrote many many thousands of lines in that. For example, producing software that had a 6 metre parabolic microwave antenna whizzing round whilst collecting receive data and generating contour plots was great fun.

Andy

[Chuck TaperParticipant @chucktaper]

I'm a retired IT professional so my opinion carries great weight.

Amongst the adept, computer languages occupy the same mental space as religion.

Mine is always "better" and all the others are crap.

Structurally they are all the same with syntactic variation enabling great obscurity.

Is it better to speak French or Sanskrit when you holiday in Kazakstan.

When the only tool you have is a hammer all problems look like a nail.

That is the great enlightenment I have come to. (That and PHP is the one ring to rule them all.)

Regards.

Frank C.

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

I fully accept that any BASIC is not what you should start to learn IF you want to be a prpfessional programmer, but I still maintan it ahas a place. Mostly for the reasons SOD said ( Our posts crossed so I didn't see his before hitting "add" on mine.

I'm going to get on my soapbox now…

One of the "things" I have against Arduinos, RPi's (and a lesser extent Python generally) is the "loads of pre-written stuff ". This allows people with little understanding to "make" things. The quality of the things is variable and if it doesn't work its hard to troubleshoot. It also, IMO, normalises bloatware. It cetainly does not promote understanding and efficent use of the available hardware. I'm sure I've mentioned the C comms libary that used all the memory in a PIC when my PBP code used the built in hardware UART.
I have the same issue with electronics "designers" who use modules for everthing. Often these are low cost things from the far east with no proper specifications or instructions. I've had supposedly qualified electronics engineers who could not design a 12V regulator because they awways bought a £2 module off amazon or ebay. When I pointed out that even the 1000 off price of the regulator chip on the board was more than twice the cost of the whole board they didn't see an issue. I immediately think the chips are fake or a lower rated part re-marked.

Rant over.

Robert.

[Clive SteerParticipant @clivesteer55943]

I think an appropriate joke regarding modern programming languages is " How many gigabytes does it need to get a light bulb to work. " I think the answer from the electrician and the IT specialist would be totally different.

CS

[Mark RandParticipant @markrand96270]

Posted by Andy_H on 22/08/2023 15:52:00:

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 22/08/2023 12:54:16

One difficulty is the large number of different versions of 'BASIC' – it's poorly standardised, leading to low portability and high re-training costs.

 

Index, and HP RMB (Rocky Mountain Basic) was a wonderful environment for creating instrument control and analysis applications. Wrote many many thousands of lines in that. For example, producing software that had a 6 metre parabolic microwave antenna whizzing round whilst collecting receive data and generating contour plots was great fun.

Andy

Very much so in the instrument control world of the '80s and '90s. By the late 1980's I had over 65,000 lines of my RMB code in use in the company handling Steam turbine performance test measurements and, latterly, turbine balancing, FFT calculation and vibration management. I'm quite proud of 100 5 1/2digit voltage readings per second spread over five data loggers, all converted into engineering units in real-time. This on a 20MHz 68020… Some of the most time critical bits were written in HP Pascal (which was closer to Modula) and the few tens of lines of really significant stuff were disassembled from Pascal and written in hand-optimised assembler.

Since then, I learned C, did some real-time PIC programming in assembler and C, for fun and profit. Now I'm learning Python in order to make a GUI based database program for all my tools and consumables, with a number of possible database engines to hold the data.

 

Edited By Mark Rand on 22/08/2023 21:27:07

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Clive Steer on 22/08/2023 20:54:15:

I think an appropriate joke regarding modern programming languages is " How many gigabytes does it need to get a light bulb to work. " I think the answer from the electrician and the IT specialist would be totally different.

CS

Only because the electrician's estimate was wrong…

In the power station:

The National Grid Control Room:

And the consumer…

Dave

[Another JohnSParticipant @anotherjohns]

Posted by Mark Rand on 22/08/2023 21:18:26:

… most time critical bits were written in HP Pascal (which was closer to Modula) and the few tens of lines of really significant stuff were disassembled from Pascal and written in hand-optimised assembler.

Modula? My second compiler I wrote was for Modula; got the specs out of "Software Practice and Experience" as written by N. Wirth; it's first use was to write an OS for a custom integrated circuit tester (both the ICs and the testers were custom).

Thanks for the flash-back from the past! JohnS.

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

Here is an interesting comparison. A modern car contains around 100 million lines of software code. A passenger aircraft has about 15 million lines.
One of the reasons for this is that avioncs software with any safety implications is not allowed to have any unused / redunant code. No libaries full of unused functions. One of the standards that defines this is RTCA DO178.

Robert.

[Author]

Posts