For me this leads to the main question: What do we want to achieve with the simulator - do we want to run algorithmic tests in any time universe or in realtime? If we want to test a SW in principle there is not need to have the proper timing like in the LCD. This leads also to the question if there is a necessity for a scope because it can only show a swingig pin, but if the frequency is proper can not decided (or difficult).
Klaus Rudolph wrote: >>>>> Using higher precision vars in the simulator only slows down the >>>>> simulation. >>>> A good point for single-cpu simulations. >>> A single cpu simulation needs no frequency value. :-) I think if you are testing an algorithm that is not time dependant there is definitvely no frequency required. If you run mutiple CPUs with different frequencies- what simulavrxx can do - you need something like a relation between each. And if you want to check a PWM,... (clock related HW-actions) you need a frequency to make it understandable. >> Alas, we're wrong. >> Even a single cpu can use four frequency sources at once: >> A crystal that determines the MIPS. If you count the clockcycles you know the MIPS. >> The watchdog. >> A crystal for the real time clock. >> An RC oscillator that times flash and EEPROM writes. These are CPU clock independant frequencies >> > Oh, yes! A single "controller" need this, the cpu not. :-) Hey, does a controller have/need a CPU? Really? :-) _______________________________________________ Simulavr-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/simulavr-devel
