Rich Webb wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 14:08:28 GMT, "Blueeyedpop"
>>the one you are most familiar with.
> <humor mode>
> No no no! It's the one *I'm* most familiar with!
> </humor mode>
> In other words, Bep is correct. Unless the OP is specifically trying to
> learn a new processor (in which case a balance 'bot is a rather
> aggressive platform for learning) the particular processor (family)
> isn't all that important, although a working knowledge with the family
> and its toolchain is a definite plus.
> Start with the basics: Many small, networked processors? A few satellite
> processors and a central brain? One big processor to run everything?
> What needs to be sensed? Sensed how and at what rate? What needs to be
> controlled? How controlled and at what rate?
> Answer those questions first and then find processors that meet those
> needs (plus a little headroom).
Take more headroom. If it workt, you always want to do more.
For comfortable working, calculate how much processing power you need
and go for a processor with at least 3 x that much power.
Need only one timer, take a processor with more timers. You don't want
to go 'oeps, forgot the uart needed a timer for the baudrate'.
But, what Bep and Rich said is true, go for a familiar processor.