Automotive micros

Am 04.10.2015 um 12:00 schrieb tim.....:
> "rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:muqolu$7ki$1@dont-email.me...
>> On 10/4/2015 4:26 AM, tim..... wrote:

>>> It was the job of designing that hardware I was referring to (someone
>>> has to do it, it doesn't just "appear")

>>> (the PP said "hardware ... which surprisingly worked without errors")

>> I think he said, "the CAN stack worked flawlessly out of the box, with
>> practically no modifications".  The stack is the part implemented in
>> software, no?
>
> OH,
>
> But it still makes my point for me
>
> that the PP's correction of my post was wrong

If you keep telling yourself that, maybe it'll come true.

> I believe they all do.  Which kind of renders the first question moot,
> if you're trying to do this professionally: you use what they allow you 
> to.

You do, but if you can choose from the list, maybe you want to avoid 
something has tripped on and had many issues? E.g. one dual core ST micro 
had an issue on one pin being transitioned from low to high during POR - 
this ended up in a continuous reset loop... The bug was not documented in 
the PDF.