Nico Coesel wrote:

> 
> Then don't bring it up. The trouble with hyperterminal is that in the
> end of the day it can do everything including releasing the serial
> port without closing the program (which AFAIK Tera term can't do). 
> 

The bad thing about hyperterminal was that it locked up or even could
blue screen the machine on older versions and the user interface is just
so clunky. The advantage of terraterm is that it is easy to use, works
on the network for telnet as well as serial lines. Also, the source is
available, in C and Pascal, so you can modify the code if your not happy
with it.

Terraterm just works, whereas hyperterminal seems to obstruct everything
you want to do...

Regards,

Chris

David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> wrote:

>On 31/03/2011 14:16, Schueler wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> thanks so far for contributing to this fruitful discussion. I finally bought
>> the
>> MDE 8051 Trainer Board populated with the MAXIM DS89C4xx 8051 derivate. It
>> features the ability to being programmed via HyperTerminal by means of a hex
>> file. Since this is my first encounter with microcontrollers, let me ask you
>> for advice how to generate a hex file for this device. Is there any freeware
>> or open source tool for this purpose of how should I proceed?
>> Thank you.
>>
>
>I don't want to start another battle here about terminal emulators. 
>Everyone seems to have their favourite - but there is a solid consensus 
>that HyperTerminal is the worst option.  I'd recommend you get Tera Term 
>Pro <http://ttssh2.sourceforge.jp/> - it's free, and works well.  If you 
>want to know what's wrong with HyperTerminal, or what alternatives there 
>are, /please/ search the comp.arch.embedded archives before posting 
>anything on the subject.  And if anyone else wants to recommend a 
>different program, and really feels it is worth the time and effort to 
>go through the subject /again/, please start a new thread.

Then don't bring it up. The trouble with hyperterminal is that in the
end of the day it can do everything including releasing the serial
port without closing the program (which AFAIK Tera term can't do). 

-- 
Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply
indicates you are not using the right tools...
nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.)
--------------------------------------------------------------

On Apr 1, 12:16=A0am, "Schueler" <berti.schue...@arcor.de> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> thanks so far for contributing to this fruitful discussion. I finally bou=
ght
> the
> MDE 8051 Trainer Board populated with the MAXIM DS89C4xx 8051 derivate. I=
t
> features the ability to being programmed via HyperTerminal by means of a =
hex
> file. Since this is my first encounter with microcontrollers, let me ask =
you
> for advice how to generate a hex file for this device. Is there any freew=
are
> or open source tool for this purpose of how should I proceed?
> Thank you.

 You can move from a DS89C4xx, to a more modern device, and make up
any compiler differences in the silicon.

 So the SiLabs C8051F581 for example, has 128KF, and 8KRam, and has
OnChip debug that works with SDCC.(not a terminal download-and-hope)

 Search for TOOLSTICK582DC, and  TOOLSTICKBA, for the low cost pair to
develop.

-jg

David Brown wrote:

[...]

>I don't want to start another battle here about terminal emulators. 
>Everyone seems to have their favourite - but there is a solid consensus 
>that HyperTerminal is the worst option.  I'd recommend you get Tera Term 

No consensue because I disagree. HyperTerminal is by far _not_ the
worst option.

Oliver
-- 
Oliver Betz, Muenchen (oliverbetz.de)

Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote:

>In message <3ZydnWuLD6WH5gnQnZ2dnUVZ8rWdnZ2d@lyse.net>, David Brown
><david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> writes
>
>> Then there is the open source SDCC.  My understanding (without having
>>used any of these tools) is that SDCC generates good, sensible code,
>>but is not nearly as clever as Keil at re-using and merging memory.
>
>I have used this one and it supports only the mainstream 8051's   The
>Dallas parts are not mainstream and use a non standard core with
>additional non standard SFR's

Well, having different SFRs doesn't hurt the compiler. As long as the
controller can run 8051 code you can use SDCC. The term support for
microcontroller families is always a bit vague. The people maintaining
GCC for the MSP430 finally agreed not to have a command line option
which specifies the controller. Instead you select the proper link
file and header files.

>SDCC does not generate good or sensible code.   Last time we had this
>discussion and it got heated someone (no names to protect the guilty)
>who was arguing very strongly for the SDCC was going to produce a
>comparison between the two.  Some two years later and we are still
>waiting....
>
>Keil used to recommend the Dunfield 8051 compiler for hobby users with
>no money.

Sorry, but the Dunfield 8051 compiler is a real piece of crap. CRAP!
CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! Yes, I admit I'm one of the dumb suckers who
actually bought the Dunfield 8051 compiler. If you have no money use
SDCC. Even the very first versions of SDCC will outperform the code
generated by the Dunfield compiler at 1/4 the clock rate.

>NOTE it is worth looking around at come of the 8051 dev kits as the
>limit on their eval Keil compilers is twice the normal one.
>
>>But then, if you were interested in writing efficient code that runs
>>quickly, you wouldn't be using an 8051 in the first place.
>
>Ouch!   Be fair the 8051 is very cost effective for a lot of things. Not
>everything warrants a PPC :-)

I'd rephrase that as: if you want to use good quality free tools, the
8051 is a really bad choice.

-- 
Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply
indicates you are not using the right tools...
nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.)
--------------------------------------------------------------

On 31/03/2011 15:51, Chris H wrote:
> In message<3ZydnWuLD6WH5gnQnZ2dnUVZ8rWdnZ2d@lyse.net>, David Brown
> <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com>  writes
>
>> Then there is the open source SDCC.  My understanding (without having
>> used any of these tools) is that SDCC generates good, sensible code,
>> but is not nearly as clever as Keil at re-using and merging memory.
>
> I have used this one and it supports only the mainstream 8051's   The
> Dallas parts are not mainstream and use a non standard core with
> additional non standard SFR's
>
> SDCC does not generate good or sensible code.   Last time we had this
> discussion and it got heated someone (no names to protect the guilty)
> who was arguing very strongly for the SDCC was going to produce a
> comparison between the two.  Some two years later and we are still
> waiting....
>
> Keil used to recommend the Dunfield 8051 compiler for hobby users with
> no money.
>
> There is the option of course of the Keil evaluation compiler. The
> biggest problem with the 8051 is the very small amount of RAM.  You
> usually run out of this first rather than program memory.  The Keil uses
> a rigorous calling tree analysis to do data  overlaying. Something you
> should not do manually! I have seen 120 bytes of data shrink to 19 bytes
> in the Keil compiler.
>
> It also comes with a large number of example programs.
>
> The other point of the Keil system is the extremely good simulator
> debugger. It will also mate with the www.labcenter.com  PCB design
> software which also has a spice simulator. SO you can actually simulate
> the hardware and software. The Lancenter SW is not expensive.
>
>
> NOTE it is worth looking around at come of the 8051 dev kits as the
> limit on their eval Keil compilers is twice the normal one.
>

Well, I'm not going to argue for or against tools I haven't used, and 
don't intend to use - I was merely passing on what I've heard, with some 
predictions on how this thread would proceed.

>> But then, if you were interested in writing efficient code that runs
>> quickly, you wouldn't be using an 8051 in the first place.
>
> Ouch!   Be fair the 8051 is very cost effective for a lot of things. Not
> everything warrants a PPC :-)
>

The 8051 is a good choice if you have a lot of legacy code, or if you 
want a weird chip that happens to contain an 8051 core.  Otherwise there 
are much better choices in almost every way - both in terms of the chips 
themselves and the tools around them.  I fully agree that not every 
project warrants a PPC - you don't buy a chip that is more expensive, 
requires more power, or is more difficult to use than necessary.  But 
you are talking about an architecture that is stuck in the land that 
time forgot - if you drop the 8051 requirement, then you can always find 
better chips.

Chris H wrote:

> 
> There is the option of course of the Keil evaluation compiler. The
> biggest problem with the 8051 is the very small amount of RAM.  You
> usually run out of this first rather than program memory.  The Keil uses
> a rigorous calling tree analysis to do data  overlaying. Something you
> should not do manually! I have seen 120 bytes of data shrink to 19 bytes
> in the Keil compiler.
> 

That's something we can agree on :-). I worked on a project where the
client was immovably opposed to hw platform change and insisted on using
a legacy platform that resulted in over 6 banks of code and data. The way
the bl51 linker overlayed everything seemed almost like magic. We did have
the benefit of generous external xdata ram space, which no doubt
helped. It's a very good toolchain indeed, if you need that sort of 
capability...

Regards,

Chris

In message <3ZydnWuLD6WH5gnQnZ2dnUVZ8rWdnZ2d@lyse.net>, David Brown
<david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> writes

> Then there is the open source SDCC.  My understanding (without having
>used any of these tools) is that SDCC generates good, sensible code,
>but is not nearly as clever as Keil at re-using and merging memory.

I have used this one and it supports only the mainstream 8051's   The
Dallas parts are not mainstream and use a non standard core with
additional non standard SFR's

SDCC does not generate good or sensible code.   Last time we had this
discussion and it got heated someone (no names to protect the guilty)
who was arguing very strongly for the SDCC was going to produce a
comparison between the two.  Some two years later and we are still
waiting....

Keil used to recommend the Dunfield 8051 compiler for hobby users with
no money.

There is the option of course of the Keil evaluation compiler. The
biggest problem with the 8051 is the very small amount of RAM.  You
usually run out of this first rather than program memory.  The Keil uses
a rigorous calling tree analysis to do data  overlaying. Something you
should not do manually! I have seen 120 bytes of data shrink to 19 bytes
in the Keil compiler.

It also comes with a large number of example programs.

The other point of the Keil system is the extremely good simulator
debugger. It will also mate with the www.labcenter.com  PCB design
software which also has a spice simulator. SO you can actually simulate
the hardware and software. The Lancenter SW is not expensive.


NOTE it is worth looking around at come of the 8051 dev kits as the
limit on their eval Keil compilers is twice the normal one.

>But then, if you were interested in writing efficient code that runs
>quickly, you wouldn't be using an 8051 in the first place.

Ouch!   Be fair the 8051 is very cost effective for a lot of things. Not
everything warrants a PPC :-)


-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 14:16:15 +0200, "Schueler" <berti.schueler@arcor.de>
wrote:

>Dear all,
>
>thanks so far for contributing to this fruitful discussion. I finally bought 
>the
>MDE 8051 Trainer Board populated with the MAXIM DS89C4xx 8051 derivate. It 
>features the ability to being programmed via HyperTerminal by means of a hex 
>file. Since this is my first encounter with microcontrollers, let me ask you 
>for advice how to generate a hex file for this device. Is there any freeware 
>or open source tool for this purpose of how should I proceed?

[Please don't top-post.]

The Small Device C Compiler (aka sdcc) is free open-source software and
is reasonable to start out with. You're probably best to begin poking
around with getting your first "Hello, world!" program (i.e., get a
selected pin to toggle at a selected rate) in assembler so that you get
accustomed to the 8051 architecture before moving on to C programming.

http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/

-- 
Rich Webb     Norfolk, VA