Hi Tony,

Since nobody else has responded I'll put in my two cents worth.

I was really disappointed/shocked in the performance numbers Scott Edwards
quoted in the article; they were something like 1,000x slower than what I
would consider a "decent" compiler (I seem to remember that a hand-written
assembler could be as much as 1,400x better) for the speed the PIC was
running at.  Now, it is 10-50x better than the STAMP, but it's really pretty
slow.

The "C" Compilers out there are a lot better in terms of producing
fast/reasonable code.

>I was just wondering if anyone had an opinion on pic basic like
>described in nuts&volts.I've written lots in basic some in C and a
>little in assembly.But I prefer basic.I'm an instant gratification sorta
>guy I guess. Tony M.

I thought Clint Eastwood said that the only thing wrong with instant
gratification was that it took too long...

myke

Today, the commercial sector is advancing computer and communication
technology at a breakneck pace.  In 1992, optical fiber was being installed
within the continental U.S. at rates approaching the speed of sound (if
computed as total miles of fiber divided by the number of seconds in the year).

Aviation Week and Space Technology, October 28, 1996