Message from discussion GA144 polyForth
Received: by 10.180.105.41 with SMTP id gj9mr2239057wib.3.1349940478565;
Thu, 11 Oct 2012 00:27:58 -0700 (PDT)
References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <HoGdnUYJTP4XC_fNnZ2dnUVZ_o-dnZ2d@supernews.com>
Subject: Re: GA144 polyForth
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001)
From: alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst)
Originator: alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst)
Date: 05 Oct 2012 19:19:57 GMT
X-Trace: 1349464797 dreader37.news.xs4all.nl 3494 184.108.40.206:34190
In article <HoGdnUYJTP4XC_fNnZ2dnUVZ_o-dn...@supernews.com>,
Elizabeth D. Rather <erat...@forth.com> wrote:
>On 10/1/12 8:40 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
>> Howerd <howe...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>> Wait, do you mean polyForth burns that much power when it's sitting
>> there waiting for input, polling the port or something? They don't have
>> edge triggered i/o? When an f18 node is waiting on a port it's supposed
>> to use almost no power; that's its whole idea.
>The standard polyFORTH multitasker doesn't shut down when there's
>nothing to do (it was not designed for low-power operation). The SwiftX
>multitasker on processors such as MSP430 designed for low-power apps has
>a very simple mod to go to power-saving mode automatically if one lap
>around the task loop yields no active tasks. Then you add one
>instruction to any interrupt code to wake up. It would be easy to add
>that feature to the GA144 polyFORTH if they want to. Assuming, of
>course, that this is what you're observing.
Look! If it is waiting for the keyboard it is consuming 700 nano Amperes!
From the point of marketing not spending this effort is a first rate
blooper. The power consumption is the single most important marketing
asset of the GA144.
In this competitive world a company that makes such marketing
mistakes doesn't deserve to live...
(Unless of course it would consume little but way more than a Launchpad.
Then they are wise not to draw attention to the fact.)