Sounds like you've got one of those modern processors with 1'. We
only had
0's... And we were lucky!
:)
--jc
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:18 AM, dlc wrote:
> Bah! You bit weenies use a COMPILER? I hand
assemble on paper, then
> flip toggle switches. Uphill, both ways!
>
> ;)
> DLC
> cfbsoftware1 wrote:
> > --- In l... , "J.C. Wren"
> wrote:
> >> I like a good old fashioned Makefile, vi, and a bash shell. Then
> >> you can get some work done.
> >>
> >
> > Nah! Only wimps use new-fangled, resource-hungry, fancy visual editors
> > like vi - real programmers use ed. On a good day I can churn out more
> > than 10 lines of code ;-)
> >
> > --
> > Chris Burrows
> > CFB Software
> > Armaide: ARM Oberon-07 Development System for Windows
> > http://www.cfbsoftware.com/armaide
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
Bah! You bit weenies use a COMPILER? I hand assemble on paper, then
flip toggle switches. Uphill, both ways!
;)
DLC
cfbsoftware1 wrote: > --- In l..., "J.C. Wren" wrote:
>> I like a good old fashioned Makefile, vi, and a bash shell. Then
>> you can get some work done.
>> Nah! Only wimps use new-fangled, resource-hungry, fancy visual editors
> like vi - real programmers use ed. On a good day I can churn out more
> than 10 lines of code ;-)
>
> --
> Chris Burrows
> CFB Software
> Armaide: ARM Oberon-07 Development System for Windows
> http://www.cfbsoftware.com/armaide
>
Reply by cfbsoftware1●February 19, 20092009-02-19
--- In l..., "J.C. Wren" wrote: >
> I like a good old fashioned Makefile, vi, and a bash shell. Then
> you can get some work done.
>
Nah! Only wimps use new-fangled, resource-hungry, fancy visual editors
like vi - real programmers use ed. On a good day I can churn out more
than 10 lines of code ;-)
Reply by Kenneth Crudup●February 19, 20092009-02-19
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, J.C. Wren wrote:
> Sounds like "IDE" may be the key word here. I
despise IDEs. They impose
> rules I don't care for, hide things you need to know about, etc. I like
a
> good old fashioned Makefile, vi, and a bash shell. Then you can get some
> work done.
What He Said.
-Kenny
--
Kenneth R. Crudup Sr. SW Engineer, Scott County Consulting, Los Angeles
O: 3630 S. Sepulveda Blvd. #138, L.A., CA 90034-6809 (888) 454-8181
Reply by Kenneth Crudup●February 19, 20092009-02-19
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Dennis Clark wrote:
> The ARM toolchains that I have tried using GCC has
been so fragile
> that if I deviate one little bit from the layout of the demo package
> as supplied, I get nothing but heartburn trying to find and fix the
> problem.
I HEARTILY disagree. I've used nothing but gcc for many years now, and
even build (actually only build) my own toolchains from scratch.
FYI,
-Kenny
--
Kenneth R. Crudup Sr. SW Engineer, Scott County Consulting, Los Angeles
O: 3630 S. Sepulveda Blvd. #138, L.A., CA 90034-6809 (888) 454-8181
Reply by tahoe_nanci●February 19, 20092009-02-19
I've done lots of AVR on my mac. And now I'm moving into ARM world.
Again, my primary dev station is the mac. Can anyone let me know what
specific toolchain setup is the most stable for mac -> lpc2148.
I am currently building the latest of everything again.
My issues don't seem to be building, linking, or flashing. Its
running on the lpc2148. And then, I can do the basic hello world
stuff. I can run most examples I've found on the net (though not
successful with jcwren lpc2148_demo -yet. It hasn't compiled for me.)
that do not call math functions.
cheers! I just joined the group yesterday, and reading reading reading...
--- In l..., "Dennis Clark" wrote: > > That's rather odd, and completely contrary to
my experience with GCC.
> > I've
> > used it on MSP430's, AVRs, LPC2148/LPC2468, x86, and PowerPCs, and never > > run
> > into it being "fragile". In fact, I consider it to be far easier to use > > and
> > get started with than some packages I've run into, like IARs. And a lot > > more reliable with far fewer quirks than many of
the inhouse rolled C
> > compilers (like the Microchip PIC18 compiler).
>
> Me too. I've found it "fragile" with ARM set ups, not the others. Once > I can generate code everything is fine - With the ARM
GCC setups that
> I've tried (and I admit to being pretty green with ARM) I've found
it
> difficult to move from this company's configuration (how they did
their
> makefile, what IDE they used, etc.) to any other configuration.
>
> Again, I'm green with ARM, I've used GCC in plenty with plenty of
other
> devices too. This could just be my experience and prejudice.
>
> IMO,
> DLC
>
> > --jc
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Dennis Clark wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I so understand your position. The ARM toolchains that I have tried
> >> using GCC has been so fragile that if I deviate one little bit from the > >> layout of the demo package as supplied, I get
nothing but heartburn
> >> trying to find and fix the problem. I've heard that Rowley is going to > >> release a "version 2" IDE/compiler that runs on OS
X. I have their AVR > >> package on Windows and like it, others have used
it at my last job on
> >> Windows for the ARM and spoke well of it. The price is better than the > >> "those other really expensive ones" as well and
more affordable to those > >> of us that are independent consultant developers
too. I can't wait to
> >> see what happens!
> >> ARM is a completely different bird from other processors because of the > >> incredible variety of strains and multiple
vendors. Using one just
> >> isn't a simple process, at least as I'm discovering.
> >>
> >> DLC
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
Reply by "J.C. Wren"●February 19, 20092009-02-19
Sounds like "IDE" may be the key word here. I despise IDEs. They impose
rules I don't care for, hide things you need to know about, etc. I like
a
good old fashioned Makefile, vi, and a bash shell. Then you can get some
work done.
I particularly don't like IDEs that have been written in Java...
--jc
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Dennis Clark wrote:
>
> > That's rather odd, and completely contrary to my experience with
GCC.
> > I've
> > used it on MSP430's, AVRs, LPC2148/LPC2468, x86, and PowerPCs, and
never
> > run
> > into it being "fragile". In fact, I consider it to be far easier to use
> > and
> > get started with than some packages I've run into, like IARs. And a
lot
> > more reliable with far fewer quirks than many of the inhouse rolled C
> > compilers (like the Microchip PIC18 compiler).
>
> Me too. I've found it "fragile" with ARM set ups, not the others. Once
> I can generate code everything is fine - With the ARM GCC setups that
> I've tried (and I admit to being pretty green with ARM) I've found
it
> difficult to move from this company's configuration (how they did
their
> makefile, what IDE they used, etc.) to any other configuration.
>
> Again, I'm green with ARM, I've used GCC in plenty with plenty of
other
> devices too. This could just be my experience and prejudice.
>
> IMO,
> DLC
>
> > --jc
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Dennis Clark
>
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I so understand your position. The ARM toolchains that I have tried
> >> using GCC has been so fragile that if I deviate one little bit from the
> >> layout of the demo package as supplied, I get nothing but heartburn
> >> trying to find and fix the problem. I've heard that Rowley is going
to
> >> release a "version 2" IDE/compiler that runs on OS X. I have their AVR
> >> package on Windows and like it, others have used it at my last job on
> >> Windows for the ARM and spoke well of it. The price is better than the
> >> "those other really expensive ones" as well and more affordable to those
> >> of us that are independent consultant developers too. I can't wait
to
> >> see what happens!
> >> ARM is a completely different bird from other processors because of the
> >> incredible variety of strains and multiple vendors. Using one just
> >> isn't a simple process, at least as I'm discovering.
> >>
> >> DLC
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
Reply by Dennis Clark●February 19, 20092009-02-19
> That's rather odd, and completely contrary to my
experience with GCC.
> I've
> used it on MSP430's, AVRs, LPC2148/LPC2468, x86, and PowerPCs, and
never
> run
> into it being "fragile". In fact, I consider it to be far easier to use
> and
> get started with than some packages I've run into, like IARs. And a
lot
> more reliable with far fewer quirks than many of the inhouse rolled C
> compilers (like the Microchip PIC18 compiler).
Me too. I've found it "fragile" with ARM set ups, not the others.
Once
I can generate code everything is fine - With the ARM GCC setups that
I've tried (and I admit to being pretty green with ARM) I've found
it
difficult to move from this company's configuration (how they did their
makefile, what IDE they used, etc.) to any other configuration.
Again, I'm green with ARM, I've used GCC in plenty with plenty of
other
devices too. This could just be my experience and prejudice.
IMO,
DLC
> --jc
>
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Dennis Clark wrote:
>
>>
>> I so understand your position. The ARM toolchains that I have tried
>> using GCC has been so fragile that if I deviate one little bit from the
>> layout of the demo package as supplied, I get nothing but heartburn
>> trying to find and fix the problem. I've heard that Rowley is going
to
>> release a "version 2" IDE/compiler that runs on OS X. I have their AVR
>> package on Windows and like it, others have used it at my last job on
>> Windows for the ARM and spoke well of it. The price is better than the
>> "those other really expensive ones" as well and more affordable to those
>> of us that are independent consultant developers too. I can't wait to
>> see what happens!
>> ARM is a completely different bird from other processors because of the
>> incredible variety of strains and multiple vendors. Using one just
>> isn't a simple process, at least as I'm discovering.
>>
>> DLC
>>
>
>
>
Reply by "J.C. Wren"●February 19, 20092009-02-19
That's rather odd, and completely contrary to my experience with GCC.
I've
used it on MSP430's, AVRs, LPC2148/LPC2468, x86, and PowerPCs, and never
run
into it being "fragile". In fact, I consider it to be far easier to use and
get started with than some packages I've run into, like IARs. And a lot
more reliable with far fewer quirks than many of the inhouse rolled C
compilers (like the Microchip PIC18 compiler).
--jc
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Dennis Clark wrote:
>
> I so understand your position. The ARM toolchains that I have tried
> using GCC has been so fragile that if I deviate one little bit from the
> layout of the demo package as supplied, I get nothing but heartburn
> trying to find and fix the problem. I've heard that Rowley is going to
> release a "version 2" IDE/compiler that runs on OS X. I have their AVR
> package on Windows and like it, others have used it at my last job on
> Windows for the ARM and spoke well of it. The price is better than the
> "those other really expensive ones" as well and more affordable to those
> of us that are independent consultant developers too. I can't wait to
> see what happens!
> ARM is a completely different bird from other processors because of the
> incredible variety of strains and multiple vendors. Using one just
> isn't a simple process, at least as I'm discovering.
>
> DLC
>
Reply by Dennis Clark●February 19, 20092009-02-19
> Does the crossworks solution include thumb,interwork
builds?
> I have an lpc2148. I need to use math functions. I've struggled for
> a week now with the open source tools on osx and windoze - and I have
> not solved this issue. On each platform I can build, link, and
> download the code into the device. If there is any call to a function
> in , the device stops working. I don't care about commercial
> vs. open source, I want to write code with a functioning toolchain and
> preferably on my mac. Does crossworks provide this functionality
> without the pain?
I so understand your position. The ARM toolchains that I have tried
using GCC has been so fragile that if I deviate one little bit from the
layout of the demo package as supplied, I get nothing but heartburn
trying to find and fix the problem. I've heard that Rowley is going to
release a "version 2" IDE/compiler that runs on OS X. I have their AVR
package on Windows and like it, others have used it at my last job on
Windows for the ARM and spoke well of it. The price is better than the
"those other really expensive ones" as well and more affordable to those
of us that are independent consultant developers too. I can't wait to
see what happens!
ARM is a completely different bird from other processors because of the
incredible variety of strains and multiple vendors. Using one just
isn't a simple process, at least as I'm discovering.
DLC >
> --- In l..., "Paul Curtis" wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> > Thanks for the heads up, crossworks is a commercial solution though. I
>> > understand it is relatively cheap, though I am really looking for
>> > something free to use for any type of applications. Eclipse, openOCD
>> > are perfect for this.
>>
>> I'm sure there would be members interested in the solution, should
> you find
>> one.
>>
>> --
>> Paul Curtis, Rowley Associates Ltd http://www.rowley.co.uk
>> CrossWorks for ARM, MSP430, AVR, MAXQ, and now Cortex-M3 processors
>>
>
