Re: Computational power AVR vs. MSP430?
From: John R. Strohm (strohm_at_airmail.net)
Date: 12/24/03
- Next message: philblack: "Re: Remote licensing system"
- Previous message: Ppelectron: "Re: Low cost PCB layout software"
- In reply to: Casey: "Re: Computational power AVR vs. MSP430?"
- Next in thread: Ville Voipio: "Re: Computational power AVR vs. MSP430?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 12:42:41 -0600
"Casey" <cclremovethispart@cox.net> wrote in message
news:YXjGb.10436$JD6.364@lakeread04...
> John R. Strohm said...
> > "Thomas W. Carley" <tcarley@eng.umd.edu> wrote in message
> > >
> > > Think fixed point math rather than floating point. It is MUCH more
> > > efficient.
> >
> > It isn't that simple. Doing fixed point math, you have to worry a lot more
> > about scale factors and where your binary point is at any given instant.
You
> > MAY have to worry about which way an operation will truncate.
>
> True... but we get paid to worry about such things.
Not enough.
- Next message: philblack: "Re: Remote licensing system"
- Previous message: Ppelectron: "Re: Low cost PCB layout software"
- In reply to: Casey: "Re: Computational power AVR vs. MSP430?"
- Next in thread: Ville Voipio: "Re: Computational power AVR vs. MSP430?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
