Reply by dl3daz January 29, 20072007-01-29
Hello,
this is my forst post to this group.

--- In m..., "Stuart_Rubin" wrote:

...

> Is there anyone developing professionally (i.e. you're not a hobbyist
> and need free tools) using GNU tools?

I am using mspgcc. The reason is quite simple: I am porting a project
from AVR to MSP430. I have been using avr-gcc before, so
msp-gcc is the best choice for me.

I came to use avr-gcc as I have been developing software for computers
("Unixoids") for years using gcc.

Have a nice weekend,
Falk

Beginning Microcontrollers with the MSP430

Reply by martin_schoenegg January 29, 20072007-01-29
Hi,
> and familiarization with MSP430. Now that i want to make a longer
> code (more than 4K), i need the comercial version but the
commercial
> version is damn expensive. i got this info from supplier.
> ...SGD$ 2,650
> ...SGD$ 3,650

There is mspgcc around too. For such which are familiar with gcc and/
or eclipse, this may be a good decision too. Forthose who looks on
the price, too.

Martin
Reply by Andreas Koepke January 27, 20072007-01-27
> I also question the code generator optimization for the MSP430 -- if
> I recall correctly, someone here did a object code output comparison
> between the commercial tools and MSP-Gcc and found that MSP-Gcc
> produced the least optimized code. I'm not sure if this is still the
> case, but I suspect it is.

Most likely, but there were other comparisons that came to another
conclusion.

> Then there is the support issue -- while the user-based support for
> Gcc tools is generally OK, you really don't have any way of knowing
> how long a fix will take for a newly discovered bug.

Well, I'm working with it for nearly four years now. Yes, there are some
bugs (type size propagation and you should not use the hardware multiplier
for "internal stuff" like offset computation done by the compiler).
Other than these I did not manage to find bugs. There is currently no
support.

It also comes with a debugger that works. Sometimes I do miss
the printf debug facility to track how some state came about. With the
latest version, backtracing does not work. It does with older ones.

> I like the fact that open source, free tools exist for the MSP430 but
> I don't think I want to rely on them for my commercial (paying)
> development work -- especially when several reasonably priced and
> well supported commercial toolsets are available.

Agreed. Most of our stuff is within tinyos -- one of the thousands of OSs
for the MSP430. Since it is used by a whole bunch of people, drivers exist
for peripheral chips (mostly flash, radio, sensors and serial comm.).

Best, Andreas

> Matt Pobursky
> Maximum Performance Systems
Reply by kirkabailey January 27, 20072007-01-27
I have to jump here and mention that I've been using the ImageCraft
professional compiler package for nearly a year and both the product
and support have been superb. I've used a lot of different
development tools over the years and I don't seem to get a chance to
say this sort of thing very often :)

Kirk Bailey

--- In m..., richard-lists wrote:
>
> Well, most vendors (ours included) have fully functional demos so you
> should just test drive a few. Our
> baseline compiler is only $200 and the debugger is $100. There are
so many
> choices that sometimes it's not even funny :-)
> // richard
>
Reply by Matt Pobursky January 27, 20072007-01-27
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 13:49:28 -0000, Stuart_Rubin wrote:
> I have had great support from IAR. I definitely would not use
> their support as a reason not to buy their tools. The price is
> high, but you get what you pay for.

I would have to disagree about this. I've been a registered user of
two different IAR toolsets over the years (PIC and 68HC11) and found
their tech support to be slow in responding and bug fixes occur at
the rate of a glacial thaw. It often took a week or more to get
answers to (relatively) simple tech support questions and I found a
few bugs that took months or longer for them to fix.

Contrast this to my experience with Imagecraft, Quadravox and Rowley
Associates (Richard, Michel and Paul, respectively). I evaluated all
of their products and asked tech support questions of all of them. I
got responses from all of them within 24 hrs.

We currently use Quadravox AQ430 tools for our MSP430 development.
Support from Quadravox has been exceptional. Bug fixes often occur
the same day as reported. As a developer, I think quick bug fixes are
a crtical item in choosing a tool vendor -- especially when the bug
you've run across is a "show stopper".

We have also used Imagecraft's AVR tools, and while we ultimately
switched to the Rowley toolset, all our experiences with tech support
and bug fixes has been outstanding.

We currently use Rowley's AVR toolset and it is extremely good. Tech
support from them has also been exceptional. Object code size is the
best we've run across and ultimately was the reason for our switch
from the Imagecraft AVR toolset.

I would have no problem recommending *any* of these tool vendors as
an alternative to IAR.

> We had been using the ImageCraft compiler and NoIce debugger with
> some success. We have products on the market which were developed
> with them. The compiler lacks a few small features but compiles
> very nice, tight code. The debugger is somewhat lacking in
> features and a little quirky. The combination is a lot less
> expensive than IAR.

Agreed. The Imagecraft tools are certainly capable and a good value.

> Is there anyone developing professionally (i.e. you're not a
> hobbyist and need free tools) using GNU tools? That may be the
> solution for the original poster in this thread.

My biggest problem with the Gcc tools for microcontrollers is the
lack of a cohesive hardware debugger like virtually all the
commercial tool vendors include. I rarely use a simulator so I expect
the hardware debugger interface to be tightly coupled with the
compiler in the source level debugger.

I also question the code generator optimization for the MSP430 -- if
I recall correctly, someone here did a object code output comparison
between the commercial tools and MSP-Gcc and found that MSP-Gcc
produced the least optimized code. I'm not sure if this is still the
case, but I suspect it is.

Then there is the support issue -- while the user-based support for
Gcc tools is generally OK, you really don't have any way of knowing
how long a fix will take for a newly discovered bug.

I like the fact that open source, free tools exist for the MSP430 but
I don't think I want to rely on them for my commercial (paying)
development work -- especially when several reasonably priced and
well supported commercial toolsets are available.

Matt Pobursky
Maximum Performance Systems
Reply by Stuart_Rubin January 26, 20072007-01-26
I have had great support from IAR. I definitely would not use their
support as a reason not to buy their tools. The price is high, but
you get what you pay for.

We had been using the ImageCraft compiler and NoIce debugger with some
success. We have products on the market which were developed with
them. The compiler lacks a few small features but compiles very nice,
tight code. The debugger is somewhat lacking in features and a little
quirky. The combination is a lot less expensive than IAR.

Is there anyone developing professionally (i.e. you're not a hobbyist
and need free tools) using GNU tools? That may be the solution for
the original poster in this thread.

Stuart

--- In m..., "Robert" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I would never recommend IAR after the crummy support I have received
> with the MSP430 compiler. Save some $'s, and lots of frustration,
> buy something else.
>
>
>
> --- In m..., "magzky02" wrote:
> >
> >
> > hello guys...I need some advice..
> >
> > i bought a TI dev kit with IAR kickstart compiler. Did some
> practice
> > and familiarization with MSP430. Now that i want to make a longer
> > code (more than 4K), i need the comercial version but the
> commercial
> > version is damn expensive. i got this info from supplier.
> >
> > DESCRIPTION PRICE
> > IAR Embedded WorkBench EW430-LE
> > + DGL-USB Embedded C/C++ Compiler,
> > Assembler, USB dongle, SGD$ 2,650
> >
> > IAR Embedded Workbench EW430-LE + DGL-USB
> > Embedded C/C++ Compiler, Assembler, Simulator,
> > JTAG Debugger software, USB dongle,
> > RTOS Plugin for CMX and UCOS-II SGD$ 3,650
> >
> >
> > As per note, there is SGD$ 1000 diference between the two package.
> > Would you think the 1st one is enough for development? What is the
> > purpose of the JTAG debugger saoftware?
> >
> > thanks for advice
> >
> > mago
>
Reply by richard-lists January 26, 20072007-01-26
Well, most vendors (ours included) have fully functional demos so you
should just test drive a few. Our
baseline compiler is only $200 and the debugger is $100. There are so many
choices that sometimes it's not even funny :-)
// richard
Reply by "b.lu" January 26, 20072007-01-26
HI,
I use mspgcc (http://mspgcc.sourceforge.net) a free MSP430 C compiler.
In my opinion this compiler is excellent, generate great optimized code,
and is completely free. Moreover you can look at generated assembler and
all C features are supported such as naked functions, interrupts, inline
assembler, ...

If you also need an operating system look at
http://blubos.sourceforge.net, it is an open source completely free
operating system for MSP430 that support multitasking preemption.

Blu
Reply by mago Umandam January 26, 20072007-01-26
I thank you all guys for the comments and advice. I'll evaluate the Rowley Crossworks for MSP430. seems more are recommending this.

mago

Robert wrote:
Hi,

I would never recommend IAR after the crummy support I have received
with the MSP430 compiler. Save some $'s, and lots of frustration,
buy something else.

--- In m..., "magzky02" wrote:
> hello guys...I need some advice..
>
> i bought a TI dev kit with IAR kickstart compiler. Did some
practice
> and familiarization with MSP430. Now that i want to make a longer
> code (more than 4K), i need the comercial version but the
commercial
> version is damn expensive. i got this info from supplier.
>
> DESCRIPTION PRICE
> IAR Embedded WorkBench EW430-LE
> + DGL-USB Embedded C/C++ Compiler,
> Assembler, USB dongle, SGD$ 2,650
>
> IAR Embedded Workbench EW430-LE + DGL-USB
> Embedded C/C++ Compiler, Assembler, Simulator,
> JTAG Debugger software, USB dongle,
> RTOS Plugin for CMX and UCOS-II SGD$ 3,650
> As per note, there is SGD$ 1000 diference between the two package.
> Would you think the 1st one is enough for development? What is the
> purpose of the JTAG debugger saoftware?
>
> thanks for advice
>
> mago
>

---------------------------------
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
Reply by Robert January 25, 20072007-01-25
Hi,

I would never recommend IAR after the crummy support I have received
with the MSP430 compiler. Save some $'s, and lots of frustration,
buy something else.

--- In m..., "magzky02" wrote:
> hello guys...I need some advice..
>
> i bought a TI dev kit with IAR kickstart compiler. Did some
practice
> and familiarization with MSP430. Now that i want to make a longer
> code (more than 4K), i need the comercial version but the
commercial
> version is damn expensive. i got this info from supplier.
>
> DESCRIPTION PRICE
> IAR Embedded WorkBench EW430-LE
> + DGL-USB Embedded C/C++ Compiler,
> Assembler, USB dongle, SGD$ 2,650
>
> IAR Embedded Workbench EW430-LE + DGL-USB
> Embedded C/C++ Compiler, Assembler, Simulator,
> JTAG Debugger software, USB dongle,
> RTOS Plugin for CMX and UCOS-II SGD$ 3,650
> As per note, there is SGD$ 1000 diference between the two package.
> Would you think the 1st one is enough for development? What is the
> purpose of the JTAG debugger saoftware?
>
> thanks for advice
>
> mago
>