Picoruby is a lightweight implementation of the Ruby programming language specifically designed for microcontrollers. Based on mruby/c, a minimal version of mruby, it aims to bring the flexibility and ease-of-use of a high-level language like Ruby to resource-constrained embedded systems. This allows developers to write more complex logic and algorithms on small devices using a familiar syntax, potentially simplifying development and improving code maintainability. The project includes a virtual machine, a garbage collector, and core Ruby classes, enabling a reasonable subset of Ruby functionality on microcontrollers.
The blog post details the author's experience porting Rust to the RockPro64 (RP2350) single-board computer. They successfully brought up a minimal Rust environment, including core libraries, allowing basic "Hello, world!" functionality and interaction with GPIO pins. The process involved building a custom cross-compilation toolchain based on a pre-built Debian image, navigating architectural differences like the lack of an MMU, and implementing necessary drivers. While challenging, this achievement lays the groundwork for more complex Rust development on the RP2350, potentially opening doors for embedded systems applications.
HN commenters generally express enthusiasm for Rust's increasing viability on embedded platforms, particularly the RP2040. Several users discuss the benefits of Rust's memory safety and performance in this context, comparing it favorably to C/C++. Some point out the challenges of working with Rust on resource-constrained devices, like managing memory allocation and dealing with abstractions that can add overhead. A few commenters also mention specific crates like rp-pico and embassy, highlighting their usefulness for embedded Rust development on the RP2040. There's also discussion around build times, tooling, and the learning curve associated with Rust, with some suggesting that the ecosystem is still maturing but rapidly improving. Finally, some users share their own experiences and projects using Rust on embedded systems.
The blog post "ESP32 WiFi Superstitions" explores common practices developers employ when troubleshooting ESP32 WiFi connectivity issues, despite lacking a clear technical basis. The author argues that many of these "superstitions," like adding delays, calling WiFi.begin() repeatedly, or disabling power-saving modes, often mask underlying problems with poor antenna design, inadequate power supply, or incorrect configuration rather than addressing the root cause. While these tweaks might sometimes appear to improve stability, they are ultimately unreliable solutions. The post encourages a more systematic debugging approach focusing on identifying and resolving the actual hardware or software issues causing the instability.
Hacker News users generally agreed with the author's point about the ESP32's WiFi sensitivity, sharing their own struggles and workarounds. Several commenters emphasized the importance of antenna design and placement, suggesting specific antenna types and advocating for proper grounding. Others pointed out the impact of environmental factors like metal enclosures and nearby electronics. The discussion also touched on potential firmware issues and the value of using a logic analyzer for debugging. Some users shared specific success stories by adjusting antenna placement or implementing suggested fixes. One commenter highlighted the challenges of reliable WiFi in battery-powered devices due to the power-hungry nature of WiFi, while another speculated on potential hardware limitations of the ESP32's radio circuitry.
This project showcases WiFi-controlled RC cars built using ESP32 microcontrollers. The cars utilize readily available components like a generic RC car chassis, an ESP32 development board, and a motor driver. The provided code establishes a web server on the ESP32, allowing control through a simple web interface accessible from any device on the same network. The project aims for simplicity and ease of replication, offering a straightforward way to experiment with building your own connected RC car.
Several Hacker News commenters express enthusiasm for the project, praising its simplicity and the clear documentation. Some discuss potential improvements, like adding features such as obstacle avoidance or autonomous driving using a camera. Others share their own experiences with similar projects, mentioning alternative chassis options or different microcontrollers. A few users suggest using a more robust communication protocol than UDP, highlighting potential issues with range and reliability. The overall sentiment is positive, with many commenters appreciating the project's educational value and potential for fun.
This blog post details how to leverage the Rust standard library (std) within applications running on the NuttX Real-Time Operating System (RTOS), a common choice for embedded systems. The author demonstrates a method to link the Rust std components, specifically write() for console output, with NuttX's system calls. This allows developers to write Rust code that feels idiomatic, using familiar functions like println!(), while still targeting the resource-constrained environment of NuttX. The process involves creating a custom target specification JSON file and implementing shim functions that bridge the gap between the Rust standard library's expectations and the underlying NuttX syscalls. The result is a simplified development experience, enabling more portable and maintainable Rust code on embedded platforms.
Hacker News users discuss the challenges and advantages of using Rust with NuttX. Some express skepticism about the real-world practicality and performance benefits, particularly regarding memory usage and the overhead of Rust's safety features in embedded systems. Others highlight the potential for improved reliability and security that Rust offers, contrasting it with the inherent risks of C in such environments. The complexities of integrating Rust's memory management with NuttX's existing mechanisms are also debated, along with the potential need for careful optimization and configuration to realize Rust's benefits in resource-constrained systems. Several commenters point out that while intriguing, the project is still experimental and requires more maturation before becoming a viable option for production-level embedded development. Finally, the difficulty of porting existing NuttX drivers to Rust and the lack of a robust Rust ecosystem for embedded development are identified as potential roadblocks.
The openai-realtime-embedded-sdk allows developers to build AI assistants that run directly on microcontrollers. This SDK bridges the gap between OpenAI's powerful language models and resource-constrained embedded devices, enabling on-device inference without relying on cloud connectivity or constant internet access. It achieves this through quantization and compression techniques that shrink model size, allowing them to fit and execute on microcontrollers. This opens up possibilities for creating intelligent devices with enhanced privacy, lower latency, and offline functionality.
Hacker News users discussed the practicality and limitations of running large language models (LLMs) on microcontrollers. Several commenters pointed out the significant resource constraints, questioning the feasibility given the size of current LLMs and the limited memory and processing power of microcontrollers. Some suggested potential use cases where smaller, specialized models might be viable, such as keyword spotting or limited voice control. Others expressed skepticism, arguing that the overhead, even with quantization and compression, would be too high. The discussion also touched upon alternative approaches like using microcontrollers as interfaces to cloud-based LLMs and the potential for future hardware advancements to bridge the gap. A few users also inquired about the specific models supported and the level of performance achievable on different microcontroller platforms.
Summary of Comments ( 4 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43451760
HN users discussed the practicality and performance implications of using mruby and picoruby in resource-constrained environments. Some expressed skepticism about the actual performance benefits, questioning whether the overhead of the interpreter outweighs the advantages of using a higher-level language. Others highlighted the potential benefits for rapid prototyping and easier code maintenance. Several commenters pointed out that Lua is a strong competitor in this space, offering similar benefits with potentially better performance. The suitability of garbage collection for embedded systems was also debated, with concerns about unpredictable latency. Finally, some users shared their positive experiences using mruby in similar projects.
The Hacker News thread for "Mruby/C and picoruby: high level langs in low-level devices?" contains several comments discussing the merits and drawbacks of using Ruby (specifically mruby and picoruby) on resource-constrained devices.
Several commenters express enthusiasm for the idea, highlighting the potential productivity gains from using a higher-level language like Ruby. One commenter points out the appeal of leveraging existing Ruby libraries and the language's generally developer-friendly nature. Another commenter specifically mentions the benefit of using Ruby for scripting and prototyping on embedded systems.
However, concerns are also raised about the overhead associated with Ruby interpreters, particularly in extremely resource-limited environments. One commenter mentions potential issues with garbage collection and memory management. Another suggests that languages like C and Forth might be more appropriate for truly tiny systems, while languages like MicroPython and CircuitPython strike a better balance between ease of use and resource efficiency for slightly larger devices.
The discussion delves into specific technical aspects, including the different memory management approaches employed by mruby and picoruby. Commenters discuss the trade-offs between a smaller binary size (picoruby) and a more fully-featured Ruby implementation (mruby). The implications of using an interpreter versus a compiled language are also touched upon.
Several comments mention alternative approaches and languages for embedded development, including C, C++, Forth, Rust, and various scripting languages. The suitability of each language is debated in the context of specific resource constraints and project requirements.
One commenter offers a practical perspective, noting that the choice of language often depends on the development team's existing expertise and the specific needs of the project. They suggest that Ruby can be a viable option for projects where developer productivity is a priority and the resource limitations are not overly severe.
Overall, the comments present a balanced view of using Ruby in embedded systems, acknowledging both the potential benefits and the challenges. The discussion highlights the importance of carefully considering the trade-offs between ease of use, performance, and resource consumption when selecting a language for embedded development. The thread provides valuable insights into the various factors that developers should consider when evaluating Ruby and other languages for resource-constrained devices.