Talk:Parallax Propeller

Untitled

I made some changes so hopefully the article now looks less like an advertisement. Mahjongg 16:30, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Made a few more myself. Bottom half could still use some work. Breakpoint 03:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I think I've condensed all the vapor into a nice espresso now; please double-check. References need to be added but everything I've added or fixed follows directly from the manual and/or data sheet. The interesting parts of the design, IMHO, are the edge cases; this should be explored more. Breakpoint 04:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interrupt simulation latency

Is this really zero or is it dictated by the current state of the round-robin mechanism? Similarly is response entirely predictable or is it subject to a small abount of jitter depending on the timing relationship between the round-robin scanner and the external signal? MarkMLl (talk) 11:27, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no round-robin mechanism needed, or used, as the propeller can use one of it's "waiting" instructions, which only continue when a specific pattern is available on the I/O port, the WAITPEQ instruction, or the WAITPNE instruction, so yes, it works without any latency variations. Mahjongg (talk) 23:54, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propeller2

Parallax was at MakerFaire again, and I asked them point-blank about the Propeller 2's ship date. They expect it to be some time this summer, and confirmed a significant increase in I/O pins. I am so looking forward to getting a data sheet so I can add it to this article... Breakpoint (talk) 22:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Built in SPIN byte code interpreter

Spin isn't a multitasking language and doesn't have threads. You can just run multiple single-threaded instances of it in separate cogs. Also, assembly can't be inserted inline into spin. I'm not editing the page now because I'm busy and I don't have the time to find references in the Propeller Manual right now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Electrodude512 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's no FORTRAN in SPIN!

"If two languages were to meet in a bar – Fortran and BASIC – nine months later one would find Spin." ... is simply wrong.

SPIN ignores identifiers' case and has no higher data structures like a triassic integer+strings only BASIC and indentation is relevant like in PYTHON. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:C0:5F01:A360:10D3:4C3C:D01:4AAB (talk) 04:34, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with wording of language in “The Forth” area of “other software“ submenu

In the “other programming language“ submenu, in the “the forth” area there is language that implies that commercial software cant be open source, it can and often is, I recommend that (if the idea is to provide additional information of free (civil rights context) software that they replace the language and the link for “open source” with the language “free software” and the link for the free software page on Wikipedia. That is if there are variants of the Forth language that are in fact free software like the language now on the page timidly suggests. Hassell (talk) 03:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]