Here's a copy of the email I got from Michel and my reply.....
To: "michelqv" <michel@mich...>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 11:53 AM
Subject: Re: Port to mspgcc from AQ430
> I am completely happy with Aq430. I have found
the
> support to be exceptional and the compiler to be
> solid.
>
> Our company was bought by AMRIX. They have a
> development philosophy of using the GCC tool chain for
> development if there is a port for the target
> processor. It has not been determined yet, but I
> suspect that we will be TOLD to use the GCC tool
> chain.
>
> I'd rather keep using AQ430, but I will not get to
> make that decision. As a result, I'd like to get a
> head start and have a gcc port ready.
>
>
> --- michelqv <michel@mich...> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Are you unhappy with AQ430...
> > We would really like to know your reasons for the
> > migration, and
> > would do our best to change your mind if possible!
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Michel
> >
> >
>
>
> ====> Andrew Barnes P.Eng
--- In msp430@msp4..., "Kent Johansen" <kent@a...> wrote:
> Michel,
>
> I think you are doing a great job.
> It took me about 2 days to get into the processor details plus the
AQ430 - the
> learning curve is almost vertical.
> I have so far had no trouble whatsoever with the compiler or
debugger environment.
> I used it for a 5-day shot at making a 6 channel,
400kHz/ch photon
counter for xray
> backscatter. (European military project.). Got a
few unpopulated
boards from the
> great people at SoftBaugh and handbuilt them to
specs after
programming the app
> on their demo board. It worked like a dream almost
right away and I
had 2 days to
> clean up, add features, make a test rig and test
everything
thoroughly. And I saved
> the rush charge on UPS. A pleasant and unusual
experience of
bagging another
> processor.
>
> The GCC would puzzle me a bit for professional development. We are
after all
> talking about ANSI C with high portability. The
real issue should
be productivity.
> Granted, I stuck to command line utilities for
quite a while
myself. It just seemed
> that typing commands were so much faster and
precise. But this
nuisance of
> Windows 3.1 unfortunately did not go away. I think
it is here to
stay like like other
> obsolete inventions like the rubber mop and the
automobile.
>
> Merry Christmas !!
> Kent
>
> > Funny you should ask. I immediately e-mailed the poster, to make
sure
> > that the reason was not dissatisfaction with
AQ430. I will let
him
> > answer here if he cares to, but I was happy
(and not surprised ;-
))
> > to find out that the reason had nothing to do
with the tools he
was
> > currently using.
> >
> > Michel
> >
> > --- In msp430@msp4..., "Michael Johnson" <mpj@r...>
wrote:
> > > What was the rationale for such a decision?
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Michael
> > >
> > > Message: 7
> > > Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:32:46 -0000
> > > From: "andnan" <andnan@y...>
> > > Subject: Porting project to GCC from AQ430.
> > >
> > > Well, our company may be moving to the GCC tool chain from
AQ430.
> > > Basically, it is a management decision
of which I have no
control
> > > over (not that I'm opposed to the
GCC tool chain).
> > >
> > > So, I have a project which is about 60% finished, totally in
> > assembly
> > > and I need to change assemblers. Where can I get detailed info
on
> > > the binutils for the msp so I can port
the assembler specific
> > stuff?
> > > I guess I need to make a make file and all that as well.
> > >
> > > An example of a mspgcc project with a make file would be quite
> > > useful. Anyone got a link for me?
> >
> >
> >
> > .
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/msp430/
> >
> > * .
> >
> > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
> >
Reply by Kent Johansen●December 23, 20032003-12-23
Michel,
I think you are doing a great job.
It took me about 2 days to get into the processor details plus the AQ430 - the
learning curve is almost vertical.
I have so far had no trouble whatsoever with the compiler or debugger
environment.
I used it for a 5-day shot at making a 6 channel, 400kHz/ch photon counter for
xray
backscatter. (European military project.). Got a few unpopulated boards from the
great people at SoftBaugh and handbuilt them to specs after programming the app
on their demo board. It worked like a dream almost right away and I had 2 days
to
clean up, add features, make a test rig and test everything thoroughly. And I
saved
the rush charge on UPS. A pleasant and unusual experience of bagging another
processor.
The GCC would puzzle me a bit for professional development. We are after all
talking about ANSI C with high portability. The real issue should be
productivity.
Granted, I stuck to command line utilities for quite a while myself. It just
seemed
that typing commands were so much faster and precise. But this nuisance of
Windows 3.1 unfortunately did not go away. I think it is here to stay like like
other
obsolete inventions like the rubber mop and the automobile.
Merry Christmas !!
Kent
> Funny you should ask. I immediately e-mailed the
poster, to make sure
> that the reason was not dissatisfaction with AQ430. I will let him
> answer here if he cares to, but I was happy (and not surprised ;-))
> to find out that the reason had nothing to do with the tools he was
> currently using.
>
> Michel
>
> --- In msp430@msp4..., "Michael Johnson" <mpj@r...> wrote:
> > What was the rationale for such a decision?
> >
> > Regards
> > Michael
> >
> > Message: 7
> > Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:32:46 -0000
> > From: "andnan" <andnan@y...>
> > Subject: Porting project to GCC from AQ430.
> >
> > Well, our company may be moving to the GCC tool chain from AQ430.
> > Basically, it is a management decision of which I have no control
> > over (not that I'm opposed to the GCC tool chain).
> >
> > So, I have a project which is about 60% finished, totally in
> assembly
> > and I need to change assemblers. Where can I get detailed info on
> > the binutils for the msp so I can port the assembler specific
> stuff?
> > I guess I need to make a make file and all that as well.
> >
> > An example of a mspgcc project with a make file would be quite
> > useful. Anyone got a link for me?
>
>
>
> .
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> .
>
Reply by michelqv●December 23, 20032003-12-23
Funny you should ask. I immediately e-mailed the poster, to make sure
that the reason was not dissatisfaction with AQ430. I will let him
answer here if he cares to, but I was happy (and not surprised ;-))
to find out that the reason had nothing to do with the tools he was
currently using.
Michel
--- In msp430@msp4..., "Michael Johnson" <mpj@r...> wrote:
> What was the rationale for such a decision?
>
> Regards
> Michael
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:32:46 -0000
> From: "andnan" <andnan@y...>
> Subject: Porting project to GCC from AQ430.
>
> Well, our company may be moving to the GCC tool chain from AQ430.
> Basically, it is a management decision of which I have no control
> over (not that I'm opposed to the GCC tool chain).
>
> So, I have a project which is about 60% finished, totally in
assembly
> and I need to change assemblers. Where can I get
detailed info on
> the binutils for the msp so I can port the assembler specific
stuff?
> I guess I need to make a make file and all that as
well.
>
> An example of a mspgcc project with a make file would be quite
> useful. Anyone got a link for me?
Reply by Michael Johnson●December 23, 20032003-12-23
What was the rationale for such a decision?
Regards
Michael
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:32:46 -0000
From: "andnan" <andnan@andn...>
Subject: Porting project to GCC from AQ430.
Well, our company may be moving to the GCC tool chain from AQ430.
Basically, it is a management decision of which I have no control
over (not that I'm opposed to the GCC tool chain).
So, I have a project which is about 60% finished, totally in assembly
and I need to change assemblers. Where can I get detailed info on
the binutils for the msp so I can port the assembler specific stuff?
I guess I need to make a make file and all that as well.
An example of a mspgcc project with a make file would be quite
useful. Anyone got a link for me?