STM32 ARM toolset advice?

Started by John Speth October 7, 2008
(Not to start a tools war but)

I'm about to start a project that will use the STM32 ARM from ST.  IAR and 
Keil both supply high quality tool sets for the STM32.  I've used both 
toolsets' evaluation copies.  I believe I'd be satisfied buying any one over 
the other.

Can anyone make any comments why one might be better than the other?

At this point, it's a flip of the coin.  I'd like to hear some practical 
opinions of current users to help tip the scales.

Thanks, John Speth


On 2008-10-07, John Speth <johnspeth@yahoo.com> wrote:

> (Not to start a tools war but) > > I'm about to start a project that will use the STM32 ARM from > ST. IAR and Keil both supply high quality tool sets for the > STM32. I've used both toolsets' evaluation copies. I believe > I'd be satisfied buying any one over the other. > > Can anyone make any comments why one might be better than the > other?
In my experinece IAR compilers are good products. Except for the licensing. I avoid dongles and license servers if at all possible.
> At this point, it's a flip of the coin. I'd like to hear some > practical opinions of current users to help tip the scales.
I prefer GCC, since it doesn't require dongles or license servers, and it's available for something besides MS-Windows. It's free too, but that's a minor factor compared to be chained to MS-Windows and a dongle. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Half a mind is a at terrible thing to waste! visi.com
Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2008-10-07, John Speth <johnspeth@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> (Not to start a tools war but) >> >> I'm about to start a project that will use the STM32 ARM from >> ST. IAR and Keil both supply high quality tool sets for the >> STM32. I've used both toolsets' evaluation copies. I believe >> I'd be satisfied buying any one over the other. >> >> Can anyone make any comments why one might be better than the >> other? > > In my experinece IAR compilers are good products. Except for > the licensing. I avoid dongles and license servers if at all > possible. > >> At this point, it's a flip of the coin. I'd like to hear some >> practical opinions of current users to help tip the scales. > > I prefer GCC, since it doesn't require dongles or license > servers, and it's available for something besides MS-Windows. > It's free too, but that's a minor factor compared to be chained > to MS-Windows and a dongle. >
Grant, Are your comments general or specific to the STM32 on GCC. I am looking for a jtag emulator to use with STM32, but the GCC development environments seems to not support any of the jtag emulators. Getting a complete development suite from IAR or Keil seems the way to go. ( sorry but I am a windoze user. ) Are there any complete development suites using GCC ( free or paid) that have a jtag interface that work out of the box ? donald
On 2008-10-07, donald <donald@notinmyinbox.com> wrote:
> Grant Edwards wrote: >> On 2008-10-07, John Speth <johnspeth@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> (Not to start a tools war but) >>> >>> I'm about to start a project that will use the STM32 ARM from >>> ST. IAR and Keil both supply high quality tool sets for the >>> STM32. I've used both toolsets' evaluation copies. I believe >>> I'd be satisfied buying any one over the other. >>> >>> Can anyone make any comments why one might be better than the >>> other? >> >> In my experinece IAR compilers are good products. Except for >> the licensing. I avoid dongles and license servers if at all >> possible. >> >>> At this point, it's a flip of the coin. I'd like to hear some >>> practical opinions of current users to help tip the scales. >> >> I prefer GCC, since it doesn't require dongles or license >> servers, and it's available for something besides MS-Windows. >> It's free too, but that's a minor factor compared to be chained >> to MS-Windows and a dongle. > > Grant, > > Are your comments general or specific to the STM32 on GCC.
Recently, I've used GCC for Cortex-M3, ARM7, NIOS2, H8, MSP430, AVR. The only IAR target I've used in the past couple years is AVR. The IAR toolchain itself worked fine, but it was a PITA to use since I had to find a Windows machine on which to run it -- then there were odd problems with network drives when ssh'ing into the Windows machine to do builds.
> I am looking for a jtag emulator to use with STM32, but the > GCC development environments seems to not support any of the > jtag emulators.
I've used gcc/gdb with three different JTAG interfaces for the ARM7, as well as JTAG interfaces for the NIOS2, AVR, and two for the MSP430. I'm afraid I don't have any experience with JTAG and the M3. As far as JTAG interfaces go, I can vouch for the fact that the Abatron BDI-2000 works nicely with gcc/gdb. I haven't used it with the M3, but Abatron says it works and I believe them. I've also read that the $10-$20 prallel-port interfaces work with Cortex-M3, but haven't tried that route.
> Getting a complete development suite from IAR or Keil seems > the way to go. ( sorry but I am a windoze user. )
Then being "chained to windows" isn't as big a problem for you. :)
> Are there any complete development suites using GCC ( free or > paid) that have a jtag interface that work out of the box ?
I've heard nothing but good things (from both Windows and Linux users) about Crossworks from Rowley: http://www.rowley.co.uk/arm/index.htm For some targets, Rowley has their own compilers, but for ARM, they use GCC. The IDE and debugger are Rowley products. Codesourcery also supplies an eclipse/gcc/gdb IDE for Cortex-M3: http://www.codesourcery.com/gnu_toolchains/sgpp/ I can vouch for the toolchain, but haven't used their IDE stuff. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! I have seen these EGG at EXTENDERS in my Supermarket visi.com ... I have read the INSTRUCTIONS ...
In message <i8KdnYvrX_7RHXbVnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d@posted.visi>, Grant Edwards 
<grante@visi.com> writes
>On 2008-10-07, John Speth <johnspeth@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> (Not to start a tools war but) >> >> I'm about to start a project that will use the STM32 ARM from >> ST. IAR and Keil both supply high quality tool sets for the >> STM32. I've used both toolsets' evaluation copies. I believe >> I'd be satisfied buying any one over the other. >> >> Can anyone make any comments why one might be better than the >> other? > >In my experinece IAR compilers are good products. Except for >the licensing. I avoid dongles and license servers if at all >possible.
IAR have dongles OR server OR node locked.
> >> At this point, it's a flip of the coin. I'd like to hear some >> practical opinions of current users to help tip the scales. > >I prefer GCC, since it doesn't require dongles or license >servers,
You buy a compiler based on the method of locking it to a machine? I tend to look at it's primary purpose and see how good it is.
>and it's available for something besides MS-Windows.
Is that relevant?
>It's free too,
Myth.
> but that's a minor factor compared to be chained >to MS-Windows and a dongle.
Religious bias noted. -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2008-10-07, donald <donald@notinmyinbox.com> wrote:
> I've heard nothing but good things (from both Windows and Linux > users) about Crossworks from Rowley: > > http://www.rowley.co.uk/arm/index.htm > > For some targets, Rowley has their own compilers, but for ARM, > they use GCC. The IDE and debugger are Rowley products. > > Codesourcery also supplies an eclipse/gcc/gdb IDE for > Cortex-M3: > > http://www.codesourcery.com/gnu_toolchains/sgpp/ > > I can vouch for the toolchain, but haven't used their IDE > stuff. >
Sticking to the STM32 subject, I will look at these links and see if they work for me. Thanks donald ( chained to my windoze box :-)
On 2008-10-07, Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote:

>>In my experinece IAR compilers are good products. Except for >>the licensing. I avoid dongles and license servers if at all >>possible. > > IAR have dongles OR server OR node locked.
Forgive me, there are 3 annoying choices instead of just 2. :)
>>> At this point, it's a flip of the coin. I'd like to hear some >>> practical opinions of current users to help tip the scales. >> >>I prefer GCC, since it doesn't require dongles or license >>servers, > > You buy a compiler based on the method of locking it to a machine?
It's one consideration.
> I tend to look at it's primary purpose and see how good it is.
If the compiler refuses to run after you replace a hard-drive or an Ethernet card, everything else is sort of moot.
>>and it's available for something besides MS-Windows. > > Is that relevant?
It is to some people, yes.
>>It's free too, > Myth.
Really?
>> but that's a minor factor compared to be chained to MS-Windows >> and a dongle. > > Religious bias noted.
I don't see how it's "religious". -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Jesuit priests are at DATING CAREER DIPLOMATS!! visi.com
Grant Edwards wrote:

>>> but that's a minor factor compared to be chained to MS-Windows >>> and a dongle. >> Religious bias noted. > > I don't see how it's "religious". >
Oh come on Grant, Bashing windozes is bashing windozes !! I for one would like to move past windoze, but noone will pay me to re-learn how to develop code. I can figure out how to run most any compiler/development suite under windoze. I have never run a linux machine. It would not take too long, however every time I try to get a job without linux/unix experience on my resume, I am told I do not qualify. So I stay in the windoze world. Lets call a spade a spade and leave it at that. donald
On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 08:01:31 -0700, "John Speth" <johnspeth@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>(Not to start a tools war but) > >I'm about to start a project that will use the STM32 ARM from ST. IAR and >Keil both supply high quality tool sets for the STM32. I've used both >toolsets' evaluation copies. I believe I'd be satisfied buying any one over >the other. > >Can anyone make any comments why one might be better than the other? > >At this point, it's a flip of the coin. I'd like to hear some practical >opinions of current users to help tip the scales. >
Keil has been bought by ARM, and AFAIK they now use the compiler from ARM. Apparently this compiler generates the best code for ARM's CPUs. GCC Generates quite good code for the ARM these days. The biggest drawback is the use of newlib. Rowley provides a nice IDE with GCC, and their own library, which removes the one disadvantage of using GCC. Their product is also available for Windows and Linux. Regards Anton Erasmus
On 2008-10-07, donald <donald@notinmyinbox.com> wrote:
> Grant Edwards wrote: > >>>> but that's a minor factor compared to be chained to MS-Windows >>>> and a dongle. >>> Religious bias noted. >> >> I don't see how it's "religious". > > Oh come on Grant, > > Bashing windozes is bashing windozes !!
I didn't think I was bashing windows. I don't use Windows, so when I choose products, those that run exclusively on Windows are ranked lower than those that support other host OSes. I also find dongles, node-locking, and license servers a hassle to deal with (I've used all three on several occasions), so vendors that don't think I'm a thief are ranked above those that do.
> I for one would like to move past windoze, but noone will pay > me to re-learn how to develop code.
I've tried developing code on Windows a few times, and I found it to be clumsy and inefficient. Windows didn't exist when I started developing embedded software. I learned under Unix, VMS, CP/M, and ISIS. I've tried Windows at varios points in its history (3.1, WfW, 95, 98, NT-4, NT-5, W2K, XP, Vista), and I didn't much like it. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! When this load is at DONE I think I'll wash it visi.com AGAIN ...