Somebody who's 50 years old may still have to work for another 20 years. That's a bit early to get stuck in a rut, especially if the rut itself is already 30-40 years old.

True, and it always pays to learn new things no matter the age, but he might also be the guy who knows things about the technology no one else does because they haven't had the first-hand experience, especially in the case of something like 6502. If you're over 50 it's a sure bet you probably know a few obscure 6502 tricks or quirks in a way someone in their 30s or even 40s won't. Back in those days we literally coded by hand until decent tools came out a decade later. I didn't even own an assembler until my late 20s, and that was a type-in.

_________________
http://WilsonMinesCo.com/ lots of 6502 resources
The "second front page" is http://wilsonminesco.com/links.html .
What's an additional VIA among friends, anyhow?

Probably, but if maintaining old 6502 code takes a considerable amount of time, it's probably a good move to switch to something more modern. And if maintenance only takes a little time, that means there's plenty left to learn something new

Just a few days ago, I was working on some code that needed a square root during a 1 kHz interrupt. Maybe some 6502 expert would come up with an incredibly clever way to avoid doing that. I figured that I was working with a fast ARM with built-in FPU, so I could just call the double precision floating point sqrt() function, and not waste any further effort on it.

I'm 47, which puts me (just) out of that range, but what I will say that a CPU is just a component of a design. I may get all misty eyed about the 6502, but that's pure nostalgia. It's from a time when everything was new and I was finally "getting it" in terms of assembly language. My first love, if you will.

I enjoy the opportunity to lean a new CPU architecture. It's a rare thing to get to do (and be paid for it), and sometimes I'll discover something myself (like the Apollo Guidance Computer - the specs of which are on the web... and it's fascinating). I've never met an assembly language programmer who can't quickly transfer onto a new architecture. Unlike the Java-script trained kids coming up through college, who don't seem to know anything, assembly programmers have a deep and fundamental (and practical) understanding of computer architecture. Registers, ALU, memory, interrupts. It's the foundation of all CPUs. They're all the same... really. Except the PIC.. It's the "Internet Troll" of CPU designs.

If this is your hobby then, as a fellow nerd, let me tell you that other CPUs are fun to discover. It's coming up to Christmas... put an ARM board under the tree and spend Christmas day ignoring your family and getting some LEDs to flash (that might not be the best advice). If this is your work, then I will say that there are different and easier ways to do things... and easier isn't necessarily bad.

This is a 6502 board. PHA; TYA; PHA; TXA; PHA forever!

The PIC32 has a MIPS core that's pretty decent, although I can't understand why they didn't just get an ARM license instead.

Right on!

Who says we can't learn new technology?
PHA:PHX:PHY

That's a strange statement to make. There are at least three different CPU architectures used in PIC chips -- the 8-bit, 16-bit, and 32-bit architectures. The 32-bit architecture is a 32-bit MIPS core (exactly which one depends on which version of the PIC32 you are talking about). Both of the other cores are RISC-based Harvard architectures, just like most other MCU families use. What makes you think any of these are "Internet Trolls?"

Edit: Fixed the incorrect quote attribution. Sorry BigEd...

The PIC32 doesn't count as it's a departure from "PIC Classic" - a 3rd party MIPS design. I suspect they chose MIPS due to both license cost (Imagination needs their MIPS to be relevant so I suspect they're almost giving them away), and to differentiate themselves in a crowded market.

I for one am glad they didn't. Nothing against ARM per se, but without competition the ARM wouldn't be half the architecture it is today. On the desktop, AMD keeps Intel honest (or at least they did in the past). I hope MIPS continues to fight the good fight with ARM so we can all benefit from it.

At 330 DMIPS(*) with an on-board FPU, the PIC32MZ series offers the Cortex M4F some strong competition if you need to run fast.

(*) According to Microchip -- I haven't verified this

I just wish they would get their competition without me having to suffer trying to decipher MIPS assembly

I agree. I've worked on ARM and MIPS, and I find them fairly equivalent. I wrote elsewhere that I work on ASICs with embedded MIPS cores, and we continue to select MIPS over generations of ASIC as they continue to perform well.

I tend to view the 65816 (and 6502) in a learning context. The lack of hand-holding forces one to actually learn how a multiplication algorithm works, or how to do a signed shift, etc. You have to either fill in the missing blanks yourself, or research the matter. Both are valuable skills.

These days I spend most of my time in C++, but found that working with the 6502, 65816, and other "easy" processors helped me understand what is going on "under the hood". (At least from a conceptual standpoint.)

It also occurred to me that older processors are known-constants, which may be important where safety/predictability are paramount.

I understand that that was a significant factor in the development of 65C02-powered pacemakers and defibrillators. The 65C02's extremely lower power consumption when WAIting or SToPped would be attractive as well.

Newer technology isn't automatically better technology.

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!

_________________
http://WilsonMinesCo.com/ lots of 6502 resources
The "second front page" is http://wilsonminesco.com/links.html .
What's an additional VIA among friends, anyhow?