Developing/compiling software

> > Is there a GCC for the 8051?  SDCC yes, GCC, as far as I know, no.
> 
> Oops.  I didn't realize the OP meant 8051.  I assumed he meant
> AVR, AVR32, or ARM.  To answer you question, there isn't an
> 8051 backend for gcc.


There is, however, SDCC, which does have an 8051 back-end.
<http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/>

Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2009-09-16, FreeRTOS info <noemail@mentioned.com> wrote:
> 
>>>> Any suggestions of the compiler software you're using to
>>>> write/compile your code and create hex files to upload to the
>>>> ATMEL microcontrollers.
>>> I prefer gcc.  It's the compiler I use for 8 other processors,
>>> and I find it helps productivity to use the same set of tools
>>> on multiple projects even when the processor differs.
>> Is there a GCC for the 8051?  SDCC yes, GCC, as far as I know, no.
> 
> Oops.  I didn't realize the OP meant 8051.  I assumed he meant
> AVR, AVR32, or ARM.  To answer you question, there isn't an
> 8051 backend for gcc.
> 

With a bit of luck, the OP is at an early enough stage that he can pick 
something other than the 8051 before it is too late...

On 17 Set, 09:35, David Brown <da...@westcontrol.removethisbit.com>
wrote:

> > Oops. =A0I didn't realize the OP meant 8051. =A0I assumed he meant
> > AVR, AVR32, or ARM. =A0To answer you question, there isn't an
> > 8051 backend for gcc.
>
> With a bit of luck, the OP is at an early enough stage that he can pick
> something other than the 8051 before it is too late...

Let's hope he will not pick a PIC. :)

Ciao Jack

David Brown wrote:
> Grant Edwards wrote:
>> On 2009-09-16, FreeRTOS info <noemail@mentioned.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Any suggestions of the compiler software you're using to
>>>>> write/compile your code and create hex files to upload to the
>>>>> ATMEL microcontrollers.
>>>> I prefer gcc.  It's the compiler I use for 8 other processors,
>>>> and I find it helps productivity to use the same set of tools
>>>> on multiple projects even when the processor differs.
>>> Is there a GCC for the 8051?  SDCC yes, GCC, as far as I know, no.
>>
>> Oops.  I didn't realize the OP meant 8051.  I assumed he meant
>> AVR, AVR32, or ARM.  To answer you question, there isn't an
>> 8051 backend for gcc.
>>
> 
> With a bit of luck, the OP is at an early enough stage that he can pick 
> something other than the 8051 before it is too late...

I used to think that, but experience over several projects where the 
choice was made elsewhere convinced me they can be very usefull. There 
are probably hundreds of variants, later spinoffs are very fast and 
there are some very good tools around. They are cheap and fast enough to 
use as logic replacement, rather than gate arrays, where no two 
manufacturers products and tools look the same or are compatable.

If you want to see a really stripped down micro, have a look at the 
Fairchild ace series.

It's just about choosing the right micro to fit the task at hand...

Chris

ChrisQ wrote:
> David Brown wrote:
>> Grant Edwards wrote:
>>> On 2009-09-16, FreeRTOS info <noemail@mentioned.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Any suggestions of the compiler software you're using to
>>>>>> write/compile your code and create hex files to upload to the
>>>>>> ATMEL microcontrollers.
>>>>> I prefer gcc.  It's the compiler I use for 8 other processors,
>>>>> and I find it helps productivity to use the same set of tools
>>>>> on multiple projects even when the processor differs.
>>>> Is there a GCC for the 8051?  SDCC yes, GCC, as far as I know, no.
>>>
>>> Oops.  I didn't realize the OP meant 8051.  I assumed he meant
>>> AVR, AVR32, or ARM.  To answer you question, there isn't an
>>> 8051 backend for gcc.
>>>
>>
>> With a bit of luck, the OP is at an early enough stage that he can 
>> pick something other than the 8051 before it is too late...
> 
> I used to think that, but experience over several projects where the 
> choice was made elsewhere convinced me they can be very usefull. There 
> are probably hundreds of variants, later spinoffs are very fast and 
> there are some very good tools around. They are cheap and fast enough to 
> use as logic replacement, rather than gate arrays, where no two 
> manufacturers products and tools look the same or are compatable.
> 
> If you want to see a really stripped down micro, have a look at the 
> Fairchild ace series.
> 
> It's just about choosing the right micro to fit the task at hand...
> 

It certainly is always about choosing the best device for the job.  It's 
just that many people /don't/ choose the best device for the job - they 
pick an 8051 or PIC because that's the microcontroller they've heard of, 
or because they used one ten years ago.  Sometimes an 8051 or a PIC /is/ 
the right device to pick, but when someone posts with no more than vague 
ideas about some tools, the chances are they are at an early stage in 
the process.  Now is the right time for the OP to think about what they 
really need, and what device family is best suited to the job - before 
investing time, effort and money in tools, hardware or development.

David Brown wrote:

> 
> It certainly is always about choosing the best device for the job.  It's 
> just that many people /don't/ choose the best device for the job - they 
> pick an 8051 or PIC because that's the microcontroller they've heard of, 
> or because they used one ten years ago.  Sometimes an 8051 or a PIC /is/ 
> the right device to pick, but when someone posts with no more than vague 
> ideas about some tools, the chances are they are at an early stage in 
> the process.  Now is the right time for the OP to think about what they 
> really need, and what device family is best suited to the job - before 
> investing time, effort and money in tools, hardware or development.

...and it's more than just the cpu. There are a lot of other factors:-
available tools and cost, ditto evaluation boards. How easy it is to get
started without inordinate expense so that you can change your mind 
later without
breaking the bank. Continuity of supply as well, so you don't get left 
high and
dry because the mfr decides to end of life the device, or doubles the 
price.

For small apps, I tend to use silabs 8051 series am working to 
standardise on
arm for the stuff that needs more performance. Both of these have loads 
of vendors
of devices and tools. Of course there are compromises - 68k arch used to 
be the
favourite for the high end, but arm are so cheap and far more powerfull, 
even
though the interrupt handling is a mess. Can't ignore the logic :-)...

Regards,

Chris

ChrisQ wrote:
> David Brown wrote:
> 
>> 
>> It certainly is always about choosing the best device for the job.
>>  It's just that many people /don't/ choose the best device for the
>> job - they pick an 8051 or PIC because that's the microcontroller
>> they've heard of, or because they used one ten years ago.
>> Sometimes an 8051 or a PIC /is/ the right device to pick, but when
>> someone posts with no more than vague ideas about some tools, the
>> chances are they are at an early stage in the process.  Now is the
>> right time for the OP to think about what they really need, and
>> what device family is best suited to the job - before investing
>> time, effort and money in tools, hardware or development.
> 
> ...and it's more than just the cpu. There are a lot of other
> factors:- available tools and cost, ditto evaluation boards. How easy
> it is to get started without inordinate expense so that you can
> change your mind later without breaking the bank. Continuity of
> supply as well, so you don't get left high and dry because the mfr
> decides to end of life the device, or doubles the price.
> 

These things are all important as well - it's up to the OP to balance
them.  At the moment, all we know is that he does not know what tools to
use - thus we can only recommend based on the cpu core and tools.  If he
comes back to us with more information or more questions, we can offer
more help in this line.

> For small apps, I tend to use silabs 8051 series am working to 
> standardise on arm for the stuff that needs more performance. Both of
> these have loads of vendors of devices and tools. Of course there are
> compromises - 68k arch used to be the favourite for the high end, but
> arm are so cheap and far more powerfull, even though the interrupt
> handling is a mess. Can't ignore the logic :-)...
> 

The original 68k architecture is pretty much dead, but ColdFire 
(basically a re-implementation of the same basic ISA) is a popular 
choice for many uses.

I agree about the ARM having lots of tools, but I thought the choice of 
practical tools for 8051 was fairly limited - either SDCC (for those who 
value the benefits of free and open source tools, or for those on a low 
budget) or Keil (for those with plenty of money looking for top quality 
commercial tools).  Are there other alternatives?

> I agree about the ARM having lots of tools, but I thought the choice of
> practical tools for 8051 was fairly limited - either SDCC (for those who 
> value the benefits of free and open source tools, or for those on a low 
> budget) or Keil (for those with plenty of money looking for top quality 
> commercial tools).  Are there other alternatives?

IAR, Resonance, Tasking, to name but 3.

-- 
Regards,
Richard.


+ http://www.FreeRTOS.org
Designed for Microcontrollers.  More than 7000 downloads per month.

+ http://www.SafeRTOS.com
Certified by T�V as meeting the requirements for safety related systems

David Brown wrote:
> Grant Edwards wrote:
>> On 2009-09-16, FreeRTOS info <noemail@mentioned.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Any suggestions of the compiler software you're using to
>>>>> write/compile your code and create hex files to upload to the
>>>>> ATMEL microcontrollers.
>>>> I prefer gcc.  It's the compiler I use for 8 other processors,
>>>> and I find it helps productivity to use the same set of tools
>>>> on multiple projects even when the processor differs.
>>> Is there a GCC for the 8051?  SDCC yes, GCC, as far as I know, no.
>>
>> Oops.  I didn't realize the OP meant 8051.  I assumed he meant
>> AVR, AVR32, or ARM.  To answer you question, there isn't an
>> 8051 backend for gcc.
>>
> 
> With a bit of luck, the OP is at an early enough stage that he can pick 
> something other than the 8051 before it is too late...

Is there something wrong with using an 8052 based CPU for a low end project.
Keil Tools are fine, but are pricey.  But if the project is small some 
8052 chip makers offer a 4K Free copy of the Keil Tools for their chips.

FreeRTOS info wrote:
> 
>> I agree about the ARM having lots of tools, but I thought the choice of
>> practical tools for 8051 was fairly limited - either SDCC (for those 
>> who value the benefits of free and open source tools, or for those on 
>> a low budget) or Keil (for those with plenty of money looking for top 
>> quality commercial tools).  Are there other alternatives?
> 
> IAR, Resonance, Tasking, to name but 3.
> 

Thanks.  Keil and SDCC are the only ones I regularly read about in this 
group.  For example in this thread, the OP asked for tools for the 8051, 
and until now no one has mentioned anything other than Keil and SDCC. 
Are they so dominant that few people use other tools for the 8051?  And 
if so, is it for technical reasons, economic reasons, or something else? 
  I don't use the 8051 myself, but I'm always interested in chips and tools.