Hi Hugh, I used 1.07. Hopefully 1.13 will be improved. Will the upgrade (from 60-days to 32KBytes) be automatic for the entry level kit? --- In , "Hugh O'Keeffe" <hugh.okeeffe@a...> wrote: > Hi Golssa, > I'm surprised about your comments re:flash programming/debugging using > Ashling tools. What version of our tools are you using ? We completely > rewrote our flash programming algorithm in v112 (released in January) and > now support programming at > 12KB/s. Also, the EmbeddedICE only has two > hardware breakpoints. If you have a breakpoint set and then attempt to step > there may be certain situations where the debugger needs two breakpoints > (PathFinder attempts to complete the full step as an atomic operation). > PathFinder shows hardware breakpoints in the Source/Disa/Breakpoint dialog > as a small blue icon (software are shown in red); in this situation, you > have to clear the breakpoint you set. Contact me off line if you need > details on upgrading. > Of interest to Ashling customers is that v113 will be available to all > registered users for download next week. This release adds flash support for > all the new LPC derivatives and support for code protection; in addition, > our entry level kit (for 295 euro) is now code size limited to 32KB (rather > than previously been limited to 60-days). > > > Hugh @ <http://www.ashling.com/support/lpc2100/> > http://www.ashling.com/support/lpc2100/ > > -----Original Message----- > From: golssa [mailto:golssa@y...] > Sent: 15 March 2004 23:17 > To: > Subject: [lpc2000] Re: Choosing an IDE for the LPC2114 > I worked with the Ashling tools too. > > Consider them if you need a good hardware board. > > But their debugger constantly runs into a "no more hardware > resources - free hardware resources" issue when stepping through code > without explaining what resource is missing or how to free resources > (sigh). This may be related to the single hardware breakpoint > problem. This makes debugging a bit annoying. It's easier to do your > debugging using Keil's simulator, or Printf style debugging. > > Another problem with the Ashling tools is the integrated Flash > download. it doesen't work well and used to be quite slow, so we > resorted to use the Philips provided ISP tool again. > > _____ > > > .

An Engineer's Guide to the LPC2100 Series

Message

Hi Golssa,

I'm surprised about your comments re:flash programming/debugging using Ashling tools. What version of our tools are you using ? We completely rewrote our flash programming algorithm in v112 (released in January) and now support programming at > 12KB/s. Also, the EmbeddedICE only has two hardware breakpoints. If you have a breakpoint set and then attempt to step there may be certain situations where the debugger needs two breakpoints (PathFinder attempts to complete the full step as an atomic operation). PathFinder shows hardware breakpoints in the Source/Disa/Breakpoint dialog as a small blue icon (software are shown in red); in this situation, you have to clear the breakpoint you set. Contact me off line if you need details on upgrading.

Of interest to Ashling customers is that v113 will be available to all registered users for download next week. This release adds flash support for all the new LPC derivatives and support for code protection; in addition, our entry level kit (for 295 euro) is now code size limited to 32KB (rather than previously been limited to 60-days).

Hugh @ http://www.ashling.com/support/lpc2100/

-----Original Message-----
From: golssa [mailto:g...@yahoo.com]
Sent: 15 March 2004 23:17
To: l...@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [lpc2000] Re: Choosing an IDE for the LPC2114

I worked with the Ashling tools too. Consider them if you need a good hardware board. But their debugger constantly runs into a "no more hardware resources - free hardware resources" issue when stepping through code without explaining what resource is missing or how to free resources (sigh). This may be related to the single hardware breakpoint problem. This makes debugging a bit annoying. It's easier to do your debugging using Keil's simulator, or Printf style debugging. Another problem with the Ashling tools is the integrated Flash download. it doesen't work well and used to be quite slow, so we resorted to use the Philips provided ISP tool again.

--- In , "golssa" <golssa@y...> wrote: > I worked with the Ashling tools too. > > Consider them if you need a good hardware board. > > But their debugger constantly runs into a "no more hardware > resources - free hardware resources" issue when stepping through code > without explaining what resource is missing or how to free resources > (sigh). This may be related to the single hardware breakpoint > problem. This makes debugging a bit annoying. It's easier to do your > debugging using Keil's simulator, or Printf style debugging. > > Another problem with the Ashling tools is the integrated Flash > download. it doesen't work well and used to be quite slow, so we > resorted to use the Philips provided ISP tool again. I'm a sucker for gcc + gdb/insight. I use this on both Winxx(with Cygwin) and Linux and have used these to deliver product. No gripes. This combo is not strickly an IDE... VIDE, which is a true IDE, http://www.objectcentral.com/, works with gcc/gdb All these tools are free to download and run on various hosts...

I worked with the Ashling tools too. Consider them if you need a good hardware board. But their debugger constantly runs into a "no more hardware resources - free hardware resources" issue when stepping through code without explaining what resource is missing or how to free resources (sigh). This may be related to the single hardware breakpoint problem. This makes debugging a bit annoying. It's easier to do your debugging using Keil's simulator, or Printf style debugging. Another problem with the Ashling tools is the integrated Flash download. it doesen't work well and used to be quite slow, so we resorted to use the Philips provided ISP tool again.

I would consider using keil uVision in cooperation with ADS(arm develper studio) compiler/linker. /Pero --- Monday, March 15, 2004, 6:20:22 PM, si napisal: > Hi, > there have been many ports to support the LPC2000 family already. > Ashling, Hitech, IAR, Keil, Rowley just to name some of them (in > alphabetical order). Also the ARM RealView and GHS support the family. > In my personal opinion, the most important consideration is what you > used so far rather than the difference in features. If you are a > migrating 51-customer and you used IAR or Keil and you were satisfied, > the logical choice is to stay with them. Same is true if you are > migrating from PIC and used Hitech or from MSP430 / AVR and used IAR, > stay with them if you like the IDE. Another consideration is what kind > of debugger / emulator you want to use. If Ashling is your first > choice, you might also want to use their compiler port (single source > supply). If Nohau is your favorite, they work closely with Hitech and > IAR. If Hitex is your favorite, the closest partner is Keil. If you > use a standard wiggler, Rowley seems to work very reliably. > The long story short, there are too many combinations to recommend an > IDE that suits everyone. > Some statements have already been made: > Rowley works nicely with Olimex tools > Keil has the best simulator (helpful for more than 1 breakpoint in > flash memory) > In general dedicated compiler such as GHS, ARM, IAR and the new kid on > the block Hitech have a little better code-density than a GNU-based > compiler. Whether that is important for you, you decide. > Summary: there are a lot of mature tools on the market and you might > want to get an evaluation version, compile some code and compare the > results based on your own code. You will also see the difference in > look and feel between the tools you will evaluate. A lot of the like / > dislike is personal taste. > Hope I did not offend any of our tool partners while still providing > some useful information ;-) > Regards, Robert > Yahoo! Groups Links

Hi, there have been many ports to support the LPC2000 family already. Ashling, Hitech, IAR, Keil, Rowley just to name some of them (in alphabetical order). Also the ARM RealView and GHS support the family. In my personal opinion, the most important consideration is what you used so far rather than the difference in features. If you are a migrating 51-customer and you used IAR or Keil and you were satisfied, the logical choice is to stay with them. Same is true if you are migrating from PIC and used Hitech or from MSP430 / AVR and used IAR, stay with them if you like the IDE. Another consideration is what kind of debugger / emulator you want to use. If Ashling is your first choice, you might also want to use their compiler port (single source supply). If Nohau is your favorite, they work closely with Hitech and IAR. If Hitex is your favorite, the closest partner is Keil. If you use a standard wiggler, Rowley seems to work very reliably. The long story short, there are too many combinations to recommend an IDE that suits everyone. Some statements have already been made: Rowley works nicely with Olimex tools Keil has the best simulator (helpful for more than 1 breakpoint in flash memory) In general dedicated compiler such as GHS, ARM, IAR and the new kid on the block Hitech have a little better code-density than a GNU-based compiler. Whether that is important for you, you decide. Summary: there are a lot of mature tools on the market and you might want to get an evaluation version, compile some code and compare the results based on your own code. You will also see the difference in look and feel between the tools you will evaluate. A lot of the like / dislike is personal taste. Hope I did not offend any of our tool partners while still providing some useful information ;-) Regards, Robert

Hi Bob, It's worth asking the question: Does the IDE support integrated Flash download and debug? This means that from an IDE you can set breakpoints in the editor, press a button and the IDE will program the flash, set the breakpoints (both of them :-<) and start the processor executing etc etc. CrossWorks for ARM can do this using either the Primary or the Secondary JTAG pins of the LPC2000 family and can program the flash at 16Kbytes per second using a standard wiggler or equivalent (our favourite is the OLIMEX JTAG ARM). Regards Michael

Message

Hi Bob,

Have you considered Ashling?. We offer a complete range of development tools including:

LPC2xxx Evaluation Board with on-board JTAG emulator

•Integrated Development Environment and Compiler (GNU based)

•Source-level Debugger

•Stand-alone USB based JTAG Emulator

•Stand-alone USB/Ethernet based JTAG Emulator with Real Time Trace support

Where are you based ? Let me know and I can get our local office to contact you. Feel free to send me any questions. For more details on our tools see our dedicated LPC2000 page (includes FAQ) at the link below:

Hugh @ http://www.ashling.com/support/lpc2100/

-----Original Message-----
From: rkd0930home [mailto:r...@comcast.net]
Sent: 14 March 2004 21:58
To: l...@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 08.82/05.00] [lpc2000] Choosing an IDE for the LPC2114

Hi, I will be starting a new project using the LPC2114 and I have to decide on an IDE to do the development. I have been considering the Rowley Crossworks and IAR Embedded Workbench. I know they are very different in price ($800 vs $3000), but when doing professional work the price difference is less important than the quality of the tools. Is the quality of the code from the proprietary compiler of IAR significantly better that the GCC compiler of Crossworks. Do either of these products have an advantage in terms of features or stability or support. Does anyone have an experience that would help me make the right choice. Is there another IDE that I should consider. I know the IAR and Rowley read this group, so if you would prefer, you can email me directly. Thanks for your help. As I become more knowledgeable about the LPC2xxx, I hope to return the favor. Bob Davis

Hi, take a look at the Keil IDE, the ARM support eval is for free (full GNU compiler, 16K limited debugger). Its the best and most integrated IDE, while still giving you the options to set command line arguments. So far, their simulator is the best I have seen. One button does it all. Very stable too.

I am not compelled to use an IDE. When I write code I like to step through it to insure that it does what I intended. I find an IDE to be a convenient way to do this. If I find a mistake, and I do make mistakes, I edit the source, compile, link, load and continue stepping. This way I very rarely have bugs in released code. Every one has their own way of working. This works for me. Now back to my question. Do you have any suggestions about IDEs for the LPC2114?