C- Programming for ARM Microcontrollers

Robert Adsett wrote:
> Stefan Reuther wrote:
> > That would have been a little harder if they'd used other platform
> > specifics such as *(char far*)0x00400017, asm { ... }, <dos.h> etc.,
> > even if that'd have saved a cycle here and there.
>
> Well,  once you include any I/O other than stdio you are definitely in
> for a porting job.  Even that wasn't portable across DOS compilers.  Of
> course stdio isn't going to be a lot of good on a lot of embedded

Well that was bad phrasing.  I meant I/O wasn't portable across DOS
compilers.  I've run into three similar schemes and seen reference to a
fourth.  AFAIK, stdio was portable.

Robert

On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 08:30:22 +0000, Chris Hills wrote:

>>
>>With the trend of semiconductor manufacturers releasing cheap 32-bit arm
>>microcontrollers with increasing sizes of flash and SRAM, efficiency in
>>the compiler is becoming less and less of an issue.
> 
> This is not correct.
> 

Maybe not for the type of work you get involved with, but it is for me. I
can get a Atmel arm, 64K flash and 16K sram, from farnell in 100 off for
�3.25. The price point and amounts of Flash/SRAM mean I don't care how
efficient the compiler is. OK - an efficient compiler means I can download
the compiled software quicker.

>>Again, with 32-bit processors at traditional 8-bit prices, compiling and
>>testing on a PC, rather than a simulator, becomes possible. Then you get
>>the advantages of using a PC.
> 
> What advantages?

Well, a PC has lots of disk space for storing test data. Also tests run
quicker. It's also easier change the tests you are performing - no need
to download a newly compiled test or set of tests to a target. And you
don't need to use a terminal + send data over serial links to look at your
results. Just compiling code, running it, and instantaneously getting the
results is kind of good.

Regards,

Paul.