how important is an emulator to an embedded engineer?

Bryan Hackney wrote:
> 
> Now an interactive debugger is not an emulator, and neither is an ICE. 
> But to assume that
> you will need one up front is to be pessimistic these days.
> 
> 
I would disagree that an In Circuit Emulator is not an emulator.

There seem to be some of you out there that are such good designers
and coders that you anticipate nearly everything and don't make
dumb mistakes that you don't see no matter how many times you
look at the code.  I envy you and applaud you.  Unfortunately,
I am not one of those people and I've never had the pleasure
of working with one AFAIK.  Unless the system is very simple,
problems of my own or those of others will crop up and as the firmware
author I am usually in the best position to find them.  Therefore,
I believe I am being practical, not pessimistic.  I don't understand
what "these days" implies, as my projects have to be done faster,
with less resources and more functionality than ever before.  I don't
have the luxury of throwing it back into the hardware designer's lap
(who sometimes might be me) without at least the courtesy of a few
details and some proof to quell arguments.  Sometimes it's the
chip manufacturer I have to deal with, and that can be a bit more
arduous.

I now expect to see a lot of responses about how this wouldn't
happen if I was a good designer.  I disagree.  Maybe you're
a whole lot smarter than me (quite possible) or maybe your systems
aren't quite as complex.  Even if the person who asked the question
has a simple system, he seems to be getting started in the
embedded world with older hardware where tools are cheap and
will probably be mature, helpful, and sometimes educational.

A person asked a question.  I gave them what I felt to be
good advice.  That's my story and I'm sticking to it :)

Tom Taylor

Tom Taylor wrote:
> Bryan Hackney wrote:
> 
>>
>> Now an interactive debugger is not an emulator, and neither is an ICE. 
>> But to assume that
>> you will need one up front is to be pessimistic these days.
>>
>>
> I would disagree that an In Circuit Emulator is not an emulator.
> 

It is. In-circuit is always called such.

> There seem to be some of you out there that are such good designers
> and coders that you anticipate nearly everything and don't make
> dumb mistakes that you don't see no matter how many times you
> look at the code.  I envy you and applaud you.  Unfortunately,

Pick your tools. My point was anticipating the need for an ICE was
pessimistic, although that was beyond the scope of the original question
(which was very vague, BTW). ICE was not a part of the question.

> I am not one of those people and I've never had the pleasure
> of working with one AFAIK.  Unless the system is very simple,
> problems of my own or those of others will crop up and as the firmware
> author I am usually in the best position to find them.  Therefore,
> I believe I am being practical, not pessimistic.  I don't understand
> what "these days" implies, as my projects have to be done faster,

"These days" there is a high level of integration, meaning there is
presumably much less hardware debugging between components when those
components are all on-board (on-chip). Another view is that most designs
are based upon stable reference designs, and the argument is about the same.
One should not _rely_ on an emulator to diagnose software composition
errors. When debugging hardware errors, there is no limit to the amount of
firepower that I would recommend. But that too, is beyond the OP's simple
question.

The OP was about 80's technology, so I admit lack of experience, or the need
for nostalgia.

[...]

There are days - I think I've had two. You get up in the morning, and code
all day without once compiling, or even stopping for lunch. You write hundreds
of LOC, and in the early evening try a compile. Everything compiles the first
time. No warnings. Everthing runs the first time. You never have to revisit the
code.

I think I've had two. I keep poor notes.





-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Creepy, Soulless Gigolo for President ? NOT !
---------------------------------------------
THK is one weird, weird something.