On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:59:45 -0800 (PST), larwe wrote:> On Jan 3, 3:05�pm, donald <Don...@dontdoithere.com> wrote: > >> But to install an IDE and compiler is harder than it looks. > > I don't really know what you're talking about here. Installing, say, > Eclipse, is a one-step operation. Installing a compiler depends on > whether you have to build it (which I usually do) or if a prebuilt > version is available.Eclipse and the plug-in to make the chip's dev tools work under Linux (Fedora or Ubuntu specificly) are just a couple of commands on the command line. I could probably learn how to do it via a gui too but already know how to do it from the command line.> But it's all useless unless there is a way to get the object code into > the target, which is the really difficult step.I love the AVR for this I have both an ISP and JTAG interface (working under Linux) for this. I have an LPC ARM board for later on. I have most of the tools on my machine from the AT91 board work I did I hope to have a JTAG for the project this time (I thought I had one but can't find it at the moment). -- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@linuxha.com http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
Microchip's PIC32 : comments needed
Started by ●January 3, 2008
Reply by ●January 3, 20082008-01-03
Reply by ●January 3, 20082008-01-03
Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:> donald wrote: >... snip ...> >> I would even pay for it. A Linux environment has got to be cheaper >> that then the $1000- $2000 IDE environments out there. > > There are no wonders. Everyone gets what he paid for. > >> Start with a FREE compiler and add the install tools that will >> make it a no brainer. > > Quite many of the commercial packages are based on the GCC core > with some modifications, wrapped into the good looking IDE. > >> I just don't understand why it has not already happened. > > It has happened. You just don't see the origin under the upper > layers.Why in heavens name do people want an IDE? One window in which to run the editor, another in which to run make and the test runs, add others as needed. All free, all controllable. -- Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net) <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> Try the download section. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Reply by ●January 3, 20082008-01-03
CBFalconer wrote:> Why in heavens name do people want an IDE? One window in which to > run the editor, another in which to run make and the test runs, add > others as needed. All free, all controllable.I used to be a fan of MultiEdit for many years. But finally I came to the understanding that a reasonable IDE is the right way to do things. There are two main arguments: 1. It is so nice when you can get everything to work in 10 minutes without the need to read through the tons of documentation and reconfiguring everything everywhere. 2. When everybody is forced to the same development environment, it simplifies the coordination. Vladimir Vassilevsky DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant http://www.abvolt.com
Reply by ●January 4, 20082008-01-04
Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:> CBFalconer wrote: > >> Why in heavens name do people want an IDE? One window in which to >> run the editor, another in which to run make and the test runs, add >> others as needed. All free, all controllable. > > I used to be a fan of MultiEdit for many years. But finally I came to > the understanding that a reasonable IDE is the right way to do things. > > There are two main arguments: > > 1. It is so nice when you can get everything to work in 10 minutes > without the need to read through the tons of documentation and > reconfiguring everything everywhere. > > 2. When everybody is forced to the same development environment, it > simplifies the coordination.What has MultiEdit got to do with it? Although editor ability to deal with several files is handy, but every editor I use can handle that. Even such disgraceful things as Notepad. The important thing is using make, which reduces compilation to a single command at all times. It will also encourage good practices, in that foul practices can lead to long compilation and linking times. Shift to the appropriate directory. Launch and use the editor. Write and save the makefile. Write the program. Save. ALT-TAB normally transfers you to the other window. Type 'make'. Run the result to evaluate. ALT-TAB and edit the appropriate file. Etc. Note that the actual compiler (or assembler) and languages only affect the make file. Use of VI(m) and/or Emacs can make editor use consistent across systems if you like, although I prefer other editors. -- Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net) <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> Try the download section. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Reply by ●January 4, 20082008-01-04
CBFalconer wrote:> Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote: >>CBFalconer wrote: >> >>>Why in heavens name do people want an IDE? One window in which to >>>run the editor, another in which to run make and the test runs, add >>>others as needed. All free, all controllable. >> >>I used to be a fan of MultiEdit for many years. But finally I came to >>the understanding that a reasonable IDE is the right way to do things. >> >>There are two main arguments: >> >>1. It is so nice when you can get everything to work in 10 minutes >>without the need to read through the tons of documentation and >>reconfiguring everything everywhere. >> >>2. When everybody is forced to the same development environment, it >>simplifies the coordination. > > > What has MultiEdit got to do with it?<Whatever Editor> + make + command line tools == IDE of your own. Why IDE of your own if there is an IDE already?> Shift to the appropriate directory. Launch and use the editor. > Write and save the makefile. Write the program. Save. ALT-TAB > normally transfers you to the other window. Type 'make'. Run the > result to evaluate.It is handy to create the shortcuts in the editor for the common operations like "make". But this is basically IDE make it yourself. Wouldn't it be easier to get used to the 'native' IDE?> Note that the actual compiler (or assembler) and languages only > affect the make file.So in the addition to the crazy enough syntax of make, you have to learn every detail about compiler, linker, etc.> Use of VI(m) and/or Emacs can make editor use consistent across > systems if you like, although I prefer other editors.Well. It has to do with how stiff you are in your habbits vs how lazy you are to learn anything new :) Vladimir Vassilevsky DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant http://www.abvolt.com
Reply by ●January 5, 20082008-01-05
Didi wrote:>> ... >> Well... I also just got a PicKit2 and this sucker's driver installer >> wanted w2k SP4 (i'm somewhere in SP3). >> fortunately, this idiot just looks at the.... InternetExplorer version ! >> ... > > Microsofts dominance has never been just about them making money. > They would have never been allowed to be where they are now if that were > so. They are all about the public having access only to controlled > "computers" (some might prefer the phrase "computerised TV sets"). > > If someone wants to sell me a chip which comes only with a wintel > system attached to it to be usable, well, he fails. There still are > other viable options.I have embraced Linux for a lot of good reasons. Well, it's a price that i pay from time to time :-( I have some long term plans to get out of this whole mess but there is no way to avoid all proprietary things, at least in the beginning.> Microchip going MIPS will make it a lot more difficult to those > "other viable options", of course - this core choice puts > Microchip out of the "automatically discarded" MCU manufacturer group. > It will depend on how many people will be willing to give up some > of their toolchains to surrender to what they are allowed to > have and use under Vista, hopefully I will not be the only one > not needing that to do development work...I'm not a specialist, but I think that you have an interesting point here, that i will try to examine more closely. Thank you for your opinion,> DimiterYG
Reply by ●January 5, 20082008-01-05
I can't seem to find the documents I downloaded last month but from what I can remember I decided it wasn't up to our requirements for an upcoming project. At this point the AVR32 family seems optimal for our uses. Sorry I can't remember any details, I must be getting old :)
Reply by ●January 6, 20082008-01-06
On Jan 4, 5:45 pm, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:> Shift to the appropriate directory. Launch and use the editor. > Write and save the makefile. Write the program. Save. ALT-TAB > normally transfers you to the other window. Type 'make'. Run the > result to evaluate. ALT-TAB and edit the appropriate file. Etc.Isn't it easier to just hit a single button marked "build" ? Cheers, Al
Reply by ●January 6, 20082008-01-06
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 21:33:28 -0800 (PST), the renowned Al Borowski <al.borowski@gmail.com> wrote:>On Jan 4, 5:45 pm, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Shift to the appropriate directory. Launch and use the editor. >> Write and save the makefile. Write the program. Save. ALT-TAB >> normally transfers you to the other window. Type 'make'. Run the >> result to evaluate. ALT-TAB and edit the appropriate file. Etc. > >Isn't it easier to just hit a single button marked "build" ? > > >Cheers, > >AlIt's certainly faster to hit <Ctrl-F10> Best regards, Spehro Pefhany -- "it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Reply by ●January 6, 20082008-01-06
On Jan 6, 7:33=A0am, Al Borowski <al.borow...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Jan 4, 5:45 pm, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Shift to the appropriate directory. =A0Launch and use the editor. > > Write and save the makefile. =A0Write the program. =A0Save. =A0ALT-TAB > > normally transfers you to the other window. =A0Type 'make'. =A0Run the > > result to evaluate. =A0ALT-TAB and edit the appropriate file. =A0Etc. > > Isn't it easier to just hit a single button marked "build" ? > > Cheers, > > AlAs long as this is all you have to do, yes. Then when things don't work as expected you will have to call the experts... Like I suggested earlier, one does not need to bother with "programming" menus if one has an issue with typing a few keys. One can just use the remote control of a plain TV set instead. Using an editor in a few windows, a debugger in another, and the debugged application in yet another etc., while being blessed with the ability to write scripts and utilities as needed, (I refer to DPS, which is what I use, but this probably applies to unix users as well) - is a whole universe to which todays IDE users have no access. Or if they have access they have no knowledge and training to work with - which has the same effect, "call the expert", years of wrestling with something doable in a couple of months. I see plenty of such posts lately, BTW... Dimiter ------------------------------------------------------ Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments http://www.tgi-sci.com ------------------------------------------------------
