On 9/1/09, a.faber <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Vasile, > > For hobby it's good, but those hobby projects will be someday production > As far as I understood, this board is targetted for the hobiiest > (i.e. single sided boards, thru hole, easy to obtain components, not too > expensive). > If it becomes a success and a someone will create a (small) batch, I would > redesign the board > based on SMD components > > > projects... I see this based on your complicated code. > Don't get this remark.
Sorry, maybe the word complex is better. It was just an admirative remark. For a better understanding, the initial Jal purpose was to start with microcontrollers with a minimum programming experience, for people of which programming is not the fist job. It was in 1999. I'm following the jal evolution (with some pauses) since 2000. I have created many projects in jal (I guess more than 100), including some in jalV2 with I'm struggling right now with a large project (60pcs after prototyping). I've noticed is easier to design and prototyping directly with SMD's as long you can see with your own eyes. This last project is the first one after 10 years with through holes, the rest was SMD. My first goal was to port old projects in jalV2, thinking will be easyest. It was not. OK, then I've start understanding the jalV2 libraries and the compiler philosophy (and still don't understand a lot of things because the speed of releasing new jal revision/jal libraries is bigger than upgrading documentation). Now I'm trying to understand other's libraries which are better software programmers that I'll ever be. My conclusion is that jal becomes a language only for software proffesionals, hard to understood by a beginner. Don't expect too much on this side. As a book writer (the first one -and for me the last one- talking about jal in 2003) I can assure you that a beginner in electronic field (which has never heard about jal before), without any programming experience, will use jalV2 with hard struggle using the library pack created and based only on the compiler and library documentation. My conclusion is based on the questions got from those book readers (from about 500 books sold, maybe 100 questions, meaning the rest never use the compiler). My opinion, as a hardware engineer ( playing with software in his spare time) the essence of a good library pack is not the speed of upgrading but the completion of documentation and examples about using those. Even some bugs aren't so important as long you catch them once. For example, some people are still learning old jal, just because the compiler is deeply explained and there are available a lot of examples, even JALV2 is one class above. I hope I didn't upset anyone, it wasn't my intention. Maybe the Jaluino developers will take something from this experience about designing the board and mostly, describing how it works and howcan be used with a library pack.. thx, Vasile --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
