next topic »

[on:]

do you know if the arduino team plan to develop an arduino IDE for the rasberry pi ?
would be great for the school and every body

thank you

[Reply #1 on:]

I can guess the answer will be no.
For lots of reasons but basically they are very diffrent sorts of things. The arduino team is bringing out the Due.

[Reply #2 on:]

AFAIK the raspberry pi has other strengths than the Arduino (see specs). Would it make sense to have the same IDE.

For school I think Arduino (UNO & Mega) can be more than challenging enough if I look at the many school-projects related questions passing this forum

[Reply #3 on:]

the purpose I see is to use the raspberry as a small PC (cheap) to work on the programming of arduino in school

could be the cheapest programming chain

[Reply #4 on:]

Yes it could be used this way without any work. Just get the Linux version of the arduino IDE and run it on the Pi, there is no need for anything to be developed.

[Reply #5 on:]

I was not sure it will work on the special fedora distribution. I guess it well need to be compiled for the specific  processor or it will need a special repository ( i don't know if the 32 bit linux version will work on the raspberry -only 256 Mo of ram)

anyway for now there is no raspberry package for the arduino software, but as the board is not really available for now .....

[Reply #6 on:]

Something nice would be a simulator that runs machine code compiled for microcontrollers, but actually uses the real GPIOs of the Raspberry Pi

Think about that, run ARM code, 8051 code, AVR code, PIC code, all from the same computer that you are compiling with, with real electrical signals going into the real world

[Reply #7 on:]

Just get the Linux version of the arduino IDE and run it on the Pi, there is no need for anything to be developed.

Actually, working ARM versions of gcc-avr, binutils-avr, avr-libc, avrdude and librxtx would be needed.  A working java runtime is also required.  Hopefully the Linux distro will provide all that?  Do any ARM distros currently provide all these?

Especially for avr-libc and gcc-avr, the specific older versions that Arduino uses on Windows and Mac, and will soon also provide on Linux with 1.0.1 (at least for 32 and 64 bit x86 platforms), should be used rather than the latest ones.

The Pi's limited 256 megs of RAM might also be an issue.  On my 32 bit x86 Linux machine, java shows 70 megs resident (and far more virtual) immediately upon launch, and of course it grows substantially with use.  Running gcc requires quite a bit of memory, if only temporarily, but if the usual Linux desktop stuff is running, and java, it's very likely that 256 megs is going to run out.  Then the already-not-very-fast Pi will need to start swapping to its SD card.  Even the class 6 speed cards are quite slow compared to conventional rotating disks.  While it technically may "work", there is an "unusably slow" point, where waiting is just too distracting from the task of developing and troubleshooting a project.

[Reply #8 on:]

Sounds like someone needs to come up with a non-Java Arduino IDE, maybe native C++, maybe Python.. Something lighter. Saying 256megs of ram isn't enough just boggles my mind. I learned to program Java back when 64mb was a luxury. Bloat bloat bloat. Given all the trouble Oracle is causing lately, it's probably a good idea to be looking for the exits when it comes to Java, anyways.

[Reply #9 on:]

Here is a project to implement an Arduino IDE in Python.

http://freecode.com/projects/gnoduino

I've heard talk about a not-yet-mature project to do the same in C++ using wxWidgets.  I can't find a link.

But speaking of C++ and wxWidgets, here's info about using Arduino on Code::Blocks.

http://www.johnhenryshammer.com/WOW2/pagesHowTo/atmelPage.php#index

Here's info about using Qt Creator:

http://www.meegoexperts.com/2011/09/qtcreator-arduino-development/

Late last year, at or shortly after Maker Faire in September, the Arduino Team showed a screenshot of an experiment to use Arduino with QT Designer, or maybe it was QT creator?  I've not seen anything on that since then.

So far, I've not heard from many people actually using these.  How useful they really are is a good question.

The 2 alternate IDE projects I have heard people actually using are based on Eclipse and Microsoft's Visual Studio.  Obviously VS is closed source and Windows-only.  Eclipse is still java based, and even far more resource intensive than Arduino!

The sad truth is the most usable and most widely used versions are suitable only for modern PCs with at least a gigabyte of RAM and fast processors.

How well any of this will work on a Raspberry Pi, even the Python version, is a very good question.

The RPi, I've recently learned, it ARMv6 instruction set, not the more modern (and more widely supported) ARMv7.  The proprietary GPU is expected to perform quite well, but the ARM processor is very slow.

For example, from this article:

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/reviews/desktops/374290/raspberry-pi-model-b

The CPU meter in the corner of the Debian screen is frequently maxed out for even the most conservative of applications, such as multitabbed web browsing. CPU-intensive applications are almost off limits: the GIMP art package took 1min 27secs just to load.  In the SysBench CPU benchmark, the Model B took 107ms to complete one calculation of the purely synthetic prime number test; a mid-range desktop Core 2 Duo E8400 took only 0.85ms.

The sad truth is modern software development trades inefficient runtime for ease-of-programming.  That trend has been with us for 20+ years as desktop computers have increased in performance.  I really don't think the Raspberry Pi is going to reverse that trend.

When all the hype fades, much like OLPC, I believe RPi will find some nice uses... particularly for streaming HD video, and probably some projects were Arduino boards find uses today, but RPi's tremendously underpowered processor and limited memory are very likely to be a terrible disappointment for anyone hoping to run conventional desktop software.

[Reply #10 on:]

The sad truth is modern software development trades inefficient runtime for ease-of-programming.  That trend has been with us for 20+ years as desktop computers have increased in performance.  I really don't think the Raspberry Pi is going to reverse that trend.

Indeed, so sad, but true. ( 20+ years is exaggerated IMHO)
I would say it has even become "trade efficient developers with cheap hardware with inefficient developers with expensive hardware".
I have been in these discussions for years now. Point is "The development shop does not pay for your hardware so the price of the end user hardware does not end up in the decision matrix."
Best regards
jantje

[Reply #11 on:]

Indeed, so sad, but true. ( 20+ years is exaggerated IMHO)

Exaggerated?  Really?

The Intel 80286 was introduced in 1982, slightly over 30 years ago.  Of course, the '286 didn't really become affordable (and widespread) until about 1988.  Likewise, the '386 was introduced in 1985, but really started to sell well by around 1990, and the '486 was introduced in 1989, and certainly by 1992 was displacing many '386 machines.

Windows 3.0, the first Windows version to become widely used, was released in 1990 and gained popularity around 1991.  Version 3.1 was released in 1992.

Even through DOS programs had been growing in capability (and bloat) for many years, as had Macintosh software since the mid-80s, certainly the transition from Windows 3.0 to 3.1 and mainstream PCs hardware from 16-bit '286 to 32-bit 386 and 486 chips could be considered the time when software bloat really began increasing dramatically.

That was 1992, exactly 20 years ago!

[Reply #12 on:]

That was 1992, exactly 20 years ago!

and suddenly I hear "Sgt. Pepper": It was ..."   

[Reply #13 on:]

Indeed, so sad, but true. ( 20+ years is exaggerated IMHO)

Exaggerated?  Really?
....
That was 1992, exactly 20 years ago!

so 20+ is exaggerated   

Greeting from Belgium
Jantje

[Reply #14 on:]

http://windowsvj.com/wpblog/2010/03/35-years-of-visual-studio-timeline/

I remember receiving my Visual C++ V1 - it came in a 1 cubic foot box!