How to interface Reed Switch sensor with 8051 Microcontroller?

Your question was how to interface reed switches with a microcontroller.

And the simple answer is: just like you interface other switches with a microcontroller.

So that should keep a final year computer engineering student going.

In fact - a final year computer engineering student should be able to figure out himself that a reed switch is just a specific form of switch and be able to go from there. That would follow from reading the datasheet of the specific reed switch together with the general information available at:
en.wikipedia.org/.../Reed_switch

So exactly why are you asking? What issues did you see that made you feel a need to ask how to interface a reed switch with a microcontroller? To get good, specific, answers, you have to write good, specific, questions.

Your question was how to interface reed switches with a microcontroller.

And the simple answer is: just like you interface other switches with a microcontroller.

So that should keep a final year computer engineering student going.

In fact - a final year computer engineering student should be able to figure out himself that a reed switch is just a specific form of switch and be able to go from there. That would follow from reading the datasheet of the specific reed switch together with the general information available at:
en.wikipedia.org/.../Reed_switch

So exactly why are you asking? What issues did you see that made you feel a need to ask how to interface a reed switch with a microcontroller? To get good, specific, answers, you have to write good, specific, questions.

Thank you Mr.Per Westermark.Now I know I make a mistake,I did not specify my question.Now I will read about all components of my project to get good knowledge about them,and if I face a problem I'll put a specific question.

Now I think learn and read about programming PIC.

Thanks

You started the thread only yesterday on 8051; why are you switching so soon?!

Probably because he randomly thinks PIC are easier, because he might have seen a schematic with a switch (maybe even a reed switch) connected to a specific PIC chip.

In the end, the complexities are similar if using 8051, PIC, AVR, ...

Indeed.

The general principles are the same whatever chip you use. If you just give up and switch chip as soon as you hit some specific detail, you will never finish anything.

The last survey said this;

Any of these will do the job well for simple embedded applications.

The 8051 has been around since 1957 and there are many variations of it available from multiple sources.

The pic has been around for a long time too [1989]. There are many variations of it too, but it is single sourced by Microchop.

The avr is newest [2003]. It runs circles around the pic at the same clock speed since it is a true risc,
while the pic consumes 4 clocks per "risc" instruction.
The avr instruction set is more powerful than pic or 8051. It is also single sourced.

so it is obvious who is best.

So the 8051 predates the invention of the microprocessor with quit a number of years. Interesting.

Next thing - lots of PIC and 8051 processors are single-clockers, i.e. one instruction/clock cycle.

Further - true RISC is not a really good thing. It means that there are very few instructions that does very basic operations. You then combine multiple instructions to solve more complex operations. Many CISC processors can manage in a single instruction what it takes a number of RISC instructions to get done.

In reality, the world have seen that neither RISC or CISC are best. So most newer designs takes the best from both worlds.

So no - it is not obvious what is best. Especially since there are so many "best" to chose from:
* best availability
* best operating voltage range
* best brutal processing power
* best low-energy operation
* best documentation
* best peripherials for the specific project
* best distribution channel
* best form factor
* best temperature range
* best compiler support
* best familiarity
* ...

By the way - you seem to have quoted a source. Why didn't you mention what source by supplying a link?

"The last survey said this"

What "last survey" - by whom? when?
Give a link!

"The 8051 has been around since 1957"

Nonsense! The integrated circuit as we know it was not invented til 1958!

en.wikipedia.org/.../Integrated_circuit
en.wikipedia.org/.../Intel_MCS-51

"The pic has been around for a long time too [1989]"

That sounds a bit late?
en.wikipedia.org/.../PIC_microcontroller suggests 1975

"The avr is newest [2003]"

Another bad date: en.wikipedia.org/.../Atmel_AVR

Give a link!

My child has better manners than you! If he spoke like that to me he'd not even wait for me to tell him to go sit on the naughty step!

Find wonkypedia for the article.

you are right.But in my project I don't need to these advantages.
So, I'll see.

thanks sir

In fact I'm confused now! which one I'll choose?? PIC,AVR or 8051 ?!
My application is simple, so I think I can choose 8051 ?? I don't need to choose the best one ! ( I think that )..

What do you think??

Take a microcontroller you have available. Or that you have knowledge about. Or that you have access to tools for. It doesn't matter which you take. Any talk about "best" is just a big fail.

On what basis did you initially choose the 8051 at (or before) you started this thread?

Certainly, nothing you've said so far is in any way beyond the reach of an 8051

Thanks Mr.Per Westermark.
I think I'll use 8051,I started learning how to program it.
I'll try to finish it.

thanks

Ok sir..What do you think?? I'll use SIM900 GSM module.

arduino gsm sim900.