Eventually, an even more indepth introduction can be found here:
http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~ellard/Courses/cs50-asm.pdf

I think the MIPS manuals are not really clear, and they are huge. I suggest=
,
at least for introductory purposes, to see elsewhere, like in the PDF's I
linked.


At 09.55 2011.10.24, you wrote:
>
>PS: for those interested, here's a small introduction to registers and ALU
>of the MIPS (PIC32 CPU), read after "A Quick Introduction to MIPS Assembly=
":
>
>http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/class/fa06/cs232/section/disc1sol.pdf
>
>As you can see coding in assembly is actually easier on the PIC32 than on
>the PIC24 or dsPIC30/33 or even more on the PIC.
>
>I use C++ a lot too, so let's not open a debate on asm vs C/C++. I just wa=
nt
>to show that asm on the PIC32 is very easy, once you get bootstrapped. The=
n
>where it's useful or not, only you and the specific project can tell it. B=
ut
>the false myth that coding for the PIC32 in asm is harder than for the oth=
er
>PICs must be eradicated. :D As the opposite is actually true..
>
>
>At 01.13 2011.10.24, you wrote:
>>On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Electron <electron2k4@infinito.it> wrote=
:
>>
>>> Something that requires good raw computing power. The dsPIC could suffi=
ce
>>> but it would draw too much current. I'm evaluating tricky ways to reduc=
e
>>> current consumption on the dsPIC xor move on / convert to the PIC32.
>>> Although
>>> I have had PIC32 chips and a starter kit for years, I haven't took a lo=
ok
>>> to
>>> it yet. Both options are quite time consuming and I need to see if the
>>> PIC32
>>> route would take too many efforts. The chips are cheap and powerful, th=
ey
>>> draw very little current, learning them may be a winner for other futur=
e
>>> projects in any case, so it was about a time I had an indepth look at t=
hem.
>>>
>>>
>>What's the purpose? Is it for a cost sensitive mass produced product? Or
>>just a few?
>
>Product (sold in the thousands, hopefully, but unlikely more than that).
>
>
>>How about a small CPLD? These things run at speeds well over 200MHz and y=
ou
>>could do your calculation in one clock cycle. They draw a lot of power
>>compared to the PIC32 but you could power them down when you don't need
>>them.
>
>CPLD's would only be able to do (and well) a part of the project. I also
>need a proper CPU and program.
>
>I have much experience with FPGA's but zero with CPLD's.. as I understand
>it while the former are dominated by interconnect, the latter are by logic=
..
>Gotta play with a CPLD someday.. I just don't have the time right now.
>
>Cheers,
>Mario
>
>--=20
>http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
>View/change your membership options at
>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.