AVR-Chat

aren't the AT90 chips the early AVR? like the AT90S8515.

Dave Mucha <dave_mucha@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> ... AVRs instruction set
> >> is not so reduced ...
> >
> >These days, what distinguishes RISC and CISC is not so much the 
size 
> >of the instruction set but whether you can perform operations 
> >directly on memory. In the AVR, you have to load data from memory 
to 
> >a register, operate on it and write it back, therefore it is RISC. 
> 
> Where did you get that idea?
> "RISC" and "CISC" are marketing distinctions.

<SNIP>

Interesting distinctions.  I had thought that CISC is Complex 
Instruction Set and RISC was Reduced Instruction Set and that the 
difference was say with a thing like square root.  If the work is 
doen in software (ie, larger code) then it might be a RISC chip, but, 
if it is done in firmware (CMOS???), it is CISC.  The main difference 
was if you needed to write code for the function or call the firmware 
code for it.... 


OK, this post is not about the similarities or differences as they 
don't seem to really effect programming.

Will the code writen for the AT90 be almost the same as the code for 
the AVR ?  Is my using an assembled boards based on the AT90S2313 a 
good idea ? or should I be more interested in using AVR devices ?

Is there a basic that will handle both ? would a C program need a 
simple alteration, or a major re-write ?

I guess what I am asking is if I had ONE micro to use, which one ?

Dave





Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

   To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AVR-Chat/
  
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
AVR-Chat-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
  
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!