In the past few days, on the official MicroPython forum, there has been a very interesting discussion about whether MicroPython can be used in product development ( Is MicroPython ready for real world deployment ). I think it is worth seeing, so I simply translated and sorted it out.
Q:
If I wanted to deploy a large number of devices and have them run reliably, would MicroPython be a risky choice?
Is it reliable to run MicroPython on devices?
Answer:
We are using Micropython in several projects (medical & industrial certified measurement equipment) for ~2 years. It was a bold decision, but it already paid off.
Some netizens replied : We are using Micropython in several projects (medical & industrial measurement equipment) for ~2 years. Certified device) have been using Micropython Ultra for 2 years. It was a bold decision, but it has paid off.
harm:
- Increased hardware resource requirements
- Lack of object-oriented programming skills
benefit
- Development efficiency
- traceability
- Testability
- portability
- Licensing and Support (Open Source)
Q:
don't the other benefits exist for C/C++ (with or without an widely used OS/RTOS) ? eg clang or gcc, FreeRTOS, etc?
Are there other functions similar to C/C++? Such as clang or gcc, FreeRTOS etc.
Answer:
MPY outperforms all the tools we know (even the ones we can't afford) for our application portfolio and a broad range of different MCU types. We came to MPY while searching for a lightweight python implementation for a linux based system to get rid of bloated shell scripts.
MPY outperforms all the tools we know (even the unaffordable ones) for our application and for a wide range of different microcontroller types. We found MPY while looking for a lightweight python based linux system to get rid of bloated shell scripts.
For this first project it ended up with getting rid of linux replacing it with MPY. Two years later we cover ultra low power systems (consuming 500nA with active REPL!) to real-time image processing, all with just one development and runtime environment.
For the first project MPY ended up replacing linux. Two years later we implemented an ultra-low-power system (including REPL that consumes only 500 nA) for real-time image processing, using the same development and runtime environment.
I'd say problems with the uPy side of things are extremely rare and the API is also very stable, and even if there is a bug or feature missing the fix takes a couple of days at most (either fix by main devs or time to get PR merged).
For uPy I would say that there are very few issues and the API is very stable. Even if a bug or missing feature is found, it will take up to a few days to fix (including major developer fixes and PR merge time)
Frankly I don't think there are many other scripting language implementations out there that work as good for the pros mentioned by chuckbook already.
Frankly, I don't think there are other scripting languages as good as the chuckbook mentioned.
Lua is ok but it's not Python. CPython works but good luck getting it to compile on non-pc or embedded pc hardware. Or trying to understand the code. C and C++ are tried and tested and pretty awesome if yo know how to use them properly, but are not scripting languages at all.
Lua is good but not as good as Python. CPython can be used, but the code needs to be compiled and understood on a personal computer or embedded PC hardware. C and C++ are tried and true, but you need to know how to use them properly.