On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 6:44 AM, Richard Man
wrote:
> I'm pretty sure the Keil ULink is the badged
version of the Segger
> JLink,
No. As far as I know, Keil U-Link only works under Keil. You may
confuse it with IAR J-Link, which is an OEM version of Segger J-Link.
Xiaofan
Anyone use Imagecraft ICC or Rowley CrossWorks?
Started by ●August 20, 2008
Reply by ●August 21, 20082008-08-21
Reply by ●August 21, 20082008-08-21
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 7:32 AM, stevech11 wrote:
>
> It came down to IAR v.s. Keil.
>
> I chose IAR. Both have free/limited, light and full versions at
> similar prices. I also liked IAR's licensing option to use a USB
> dongle making it easy to work at home or on-site without a hassle.
Same here. We choose to buy IAR (USB dongle option).
If money is not the main issue, say, for company work and the
cost of the compiler is roughly equal to one month's salary of
the firmware engineer, many will choose either IAR or Keil.
But for small developers or hobbyists, compiler cost does
matter.
Xiaofan
>
> It came down to IAR v.s. Keil.
>
> I chose IAR. Both have free/limited, light and full versions at
> similar prices. I also liked IAR's licensing option to use a USB
> dongle making it easy to work at home or on-site without a hassle.
Same here. We choose to buy IAR (USB dongle option).
If money is not the main issue, say, for company work and the
cost of the compiler is roughly equal to one month's salary of
the firmware engineer, many will choose either IAR or Keil.
But for small developers or hobbyists, compiler cost does
matter.
Xiaofan
Reply by ●August 21, 20082008-08-21
At 02:55 AM 8/21/2008, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 6:44 AM, Richard Man
> wrote:
> > I'm pretty sure the Keil ULink is the badged version of the Segger
> > JLink,
>
>No. As far as I know, Keil U-Link only works under Keil. You may
>confuse it with IAR J-Link, which is an OEM version of Segger J-Link.
I stand corrected.
// richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly,
please use richard at imagecraft.com)
>On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 6:44 AM, Richard Man
> wrote:
> > I'm pretty sure the Keil ULink is the badged version of the Segger
> > JLink,
>
>No. As far as I know, Keil U-Link only works under Keil. You may
>confuse it with IAR J-Link, which is an OEM version of Segger J-Link.
I stand corrected.
// richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly,
please use richard at imagecraft.com)
Reply by ●August 21, 20082008-08-21
> I'm not worried about
>GCC's code density but I am worried that I'll tear all my hair out
>trying to get GCC going from scratch for whatever SBC I finally pick
>to experiment with. Recall I wanted a board <$200. I guess I need to
>invest $100 (?) for some kind of JTAG dongle, even though I own a Keil
>ULink (door prize).
I tried IAR, and ran into several bugs right away. Fought those for two weeks. I tried ICC also, but it lacked several features. Then I tried GNUARM, and I had code compiled and running in 2 hours. For the past 4 years I have used GNUARM ever since. Very happy with the results. The $$$$ guys always want to tell you that their compiler is faster or smaller, which typically matters very little on these projects. The optimization differences are generally trivial. But they never say it is more robust or bug free. If GCC is good enough to compile giga bytes of Linux, it's certainly good enough for my embedded projects. The fact that several of these compiler vendors have done little more than put a wrapper around their GCC offering, shows you how difficult it is to beat GCC.
There is so much good free code and open source available today that I feel it is far more risky now to invest in proprietary compilers. GCC is widely supported and likely always will be, where many of these other compilers may have their days numbered. The fact that Keil went under (bought by ARM) and Nohau went under are just a couple examples of the problem. Its difficult to sell proprietary tools for $$$$ when there are very good tools available for free. Often the free tools are better than the pay tools.
Chris.
>GCC's code density but I am worried that I'll tear all my hair out
>trying to get GCC going from scratch for whatever SBC I finally pick
>to experiment with. Recall I wanted a board <$200. I guess I need to
>invest $100 (?) for some kind of JTAG dongle, even though I own a Keil
>ULink (door prize).
I tried IAR, and ran into several bugs right away. Fought those for two weeks. I tried ICC also, but it lacked several features. Then I tried GNUARM, and I had code compiled and running in 2 hours. For the past 4 years I have used GNUARM ever since. Very happy with the results. The $$$$ guys always want to tell you that their compiler is faster or smaller, which typically matters very little on these projects. The optimization differences are generally trivial. But they never say it is more robust or bug free. If GCC is good enough to compile giga bytes of Linux, it's certainly good enough for my embedded projects. The fact that several of these compiler vendors have done little more than put a wrapper around their GCC offering, shows you how difficult it is to beat GCC.
There is so much good free code and open source available today that I feel it is far more risky now to invest in proprietary compilers. GCC is widely supported and likely always will be, where many of these other compilers may have their days numbered. The fact that Keil went under (bought by ARM) and Nohau went under are just a couple examples of the problem. Its difficult to sell proprietary tools for $$$$ when there are very good tools available for free. Often the free tools are better than the pay tools.
Chris.
Reply by ●August 21, 20082008-08-21
> Same here. We choose to buy IAR (USB dongle
option).
>
> If money is not the main issue, say, for company work and the
> cost of the compiler is roughly equal to one month's salary of
> the firmware engineer, many will choose either IAR or Keil.
>
> But for small developers or hobbyists, compiler cost does
> matter.
>
NOT Same here,
We tried GCC, and never looked back... since last 10 years.
Compiler cost does not matter for us also, but we chose GCC, because it's
best.
Warm Regards,
Mukund Deshmukh,
Beta Computronics Pvt Ltd.
10/1 IT Park, Parsodi,
Nagpur -440022 India.
Web site - http://betacomp.com
Meet us at Booth I102, Taipei PLAS 2008, Sept 18-22 , Taiwan.
>
> If money is not the main issue, say, for company work and the
> cost of the compiler is roughly equal to one month's salary of
> the firmware engineer, many will choose either IAR or Keil.
>
> But for small developers or hobbyists, compiler cost does
> matter.
>
NOT Same here,
We tried GCC, and never looked back... since last 10 years.
Compiler cost does not matter for us also, but we chose GCC, because it's
best.
Warm Regards,
Mukund Deshmukh,
Beta Computronics Pvt Ltd.
10/1 IT Park, Parsodi,
Nagpur -440022 India.
Web site - http://betacomp.com
Meet us at Booth I102, Taipei PLAS 2008, Sept 18-22 , Taiwan.
Reply by ●August 21, 20082008-08-21
--- In l..., "bobtransformer" wrote:
>
> If ImageCrap for ARM is anything like ImageCrap for Cypress PSoC,
> stayFAR away from that one.
Having used ImageCraft on more than one CPU I don't think the blame of
poor performance is properly pointed solely at ImageCraft. First, how
Cypress could design a "new" CPU in this day as pitiful as the M8 is
beyond me. What I've always liked about ImageCraft was the
"ANSI-ness" of it compared to other (8-bit) compiler companies. Ever
try the ByteCraft (rebadged Cypress) compiler for the rest of the
Cypress M8 family? I bet I'm one of only a handful of people on the
planet that persevered in getting a product to market using C on it.
But hey, the code density was pretty good ;-)
Anyway, back on topic, I have nothing against GCC but I'm no longer a
command-line-jockey. So GCC is fine, though I'd rather not go through
the whole Cygwin experience again. I'm a little more concerned about
getting my startup code to work and getting those first blinking
lights and Hello World to work. So kudos to Rowley for the plethora of
board support packages and kudos to ImageCraft for the IDE device
selection.
And thanks to all who contributed to the discussion. I believe it is
helping a lot.
>
> If ImageCrap for ARM is anything like ImageCrap for Cypress PSoC,
> stayFAR away from that one.
Having used ImageCraft on more than one CPU I don't think the blame of
poor performance is properly pointed solely at ImageCraft. First, how
Cypress could design a "new" CPU in this day as pitiful as the M8 is
beyond me. What I've always liked about ImageCraft was the
"ANSI-ness" of it compared to other (8-bit) compiler companies. Ever
try the ByteCraft (rebadged Cypress) compiler for the rest of the
Cypress M8 family? I bet I'm one of only a handful of people on the
planet that persevered in getting a product to market using C on it.
But hey, the code density was pretty good ;-)
Anyway, back on topic, I have nothing against GCC but I'm no longer a
command-line-jockey. So GCC is fine, though I'd rather not go through
the whole Cygwin experience again. I'm a little more concerned about
getting my startup code to work and getting those first blinking
lights and Hello World to work. So kudos to Rowley for the plethora of
board support packages and kudos to ImageCraft for the IDE device
selection.
And thanks to all who contributed to the discussion. I believe it is
helping a lot.
Reply by ●August 21, 20082008-08-21
grantpbt wrote:
> I'm evaluating cheap compilers and it appears Keil is 16k limited for
> eval and IAR is 32 limited for eval. Both reasonably generous for
> learning I suppose, though I'm sure there are some gotcha's in there
> somewhere.
>
> So I'm also looking at Imagecraft's compiler (I've used them before
> with HC11 and PSoC) or maybe Rowley CrossWorks. I'm not worried
> about GCC's code density but I am worried that I'll tear all my hair
> out trying to get GCC going from scratch for whatever SBC I finally
> pick to experiment with. Recall I wanted a board <$200. I guess I
> need to invest $100 (?) for some kind of JTAG dongle, even though I
> own a Keil ULink (door prize).
>
> Any newbies out there that have brought these up from scratch and can
> provide any recommendations or horror stories?
I have recently started using Rowley Crossworks (with their Crossconnect
Lite JTAG device) and I must say their support is absolutely excellent,
it's been very simple to get going. Check if they do a board support
package for the board you are intending to get as this makes it even
simpler. We decided against Keil and IAR on the grounds of cost.
I also use the Atmel AVR version of the Imagecraft compiler and the
support is excellent on that as well, but I can't comment on the ARM
version.
--
Tim Mitchell
> I'm evaluating cheap compilers and it appears Keil is 16k limited for
> eval and IAR is 32 limited for eval. Both reasonably generous for
> learning I suppose, though I'm sure there are some gotcha's in there
> somewhere.
>
> So I'm also looking at Imagecraft's compiler (I've used them before
> with HC11 and PSoC) or maybe Rowley CrossWorks. I'm not worried
> about GCC's code density but I am worried that I'll tear all my hair
> out trying to get GCC going from scratch for whatever SBC I finally
> pick to experiment with. Recall I wanted a board <$200. I guess I
> need to invest $100 (?) for some kind of JTAG dongle, even though I
> own a Keil ULink (door prize).
>
> Any newbies out there that have brought these up from scratch and can
> provide any recommendations or horror stories?
I have recently started using Rowley Crossworks (with their Crossconnect
Lite JTAG device) and I must say their support is absolutely excellent,
it's been very simple to get going. Check if they do a board support
package for the board you are intending to get as this makes it even
simpler. We decided against Keil and IAR on the grounds of cost.
I also use the Atmel AVR version of the Imagecraft compiler and the
support is excellent on that as well, but I can't comment on the ARM
version.
--
Tim Mitchell
Reply by ●August 21, 20082008-08-21
We chose Rowley about a year ago, not for price but for the freedom that the
IDE provides. When we evaluated IAR, Keil and Rowley the compiled code was
within 1% of each other. Imagecraft had announced a IDE but did not actually
have one.
We have found the support has been excellent. Best of all we have used the
same IDE for projects using NXP, ST, and Intel ARM7, ARM9, and Cortex cores
Ultimately you like what you know.
_____
From: FreeRTOS.org Info [mailto:n...@FreeRTOS.org]
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 3:48 AM
To: l...
Subject: RE: [lpc2000] Re: Anyone use Imagecraft ICC or Rowley CrossWorks?
> I ~think~ that IAR and Keil are the top guys, but the GNU based ones
> (Crossworks) is a close second (2nd only because of compiled
> code size).
With optimisation on, dead code stripped out, and no use of 'off the shelf'
GCC libraries (which are intended for large systems, Rowley I think provide
their own libraries BTW) what is the real difference in code size? Not that
great I don't think.
Regards,
Richard.
+ http://www.FreeRTOS .org
17 official architecture ports, more than 6000 downloads per month.
+ http://www.SafeRTOS .com
Certified by T as meeting the requirements for safety related systems.
IDE provides. When we evaluated IAR, Keil and Rowley the compiled code was
within 1% of each other. Imagecraft had announced a IDE but did not actually
have one.
We have found the support has been excellent. Best of all we have used the
same IDE for projects using NXP, ST, and Intel ARM7, ARM9, and Cortex cores
Ultimately you like what you know.
_____
From: FreeRTOS.org Info [mailto:n...@FreeRTOS.org]
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 3:48 AM
To: l...
Subject: RE: [lpc2000] Re: Anyone use Imagecraft ICC or Rowley CrossWorks?
> I ~think~ that IAR and Keil are the top guys, but the GNU based ones
> (Crossworks) is a close second (2nd only because of compiled
> code size).
With optimisation on, dead code stripped out, and no use of 'off the shelf'
GCC libraries (which are intended for large systems, Rowley I think provide
their own libraries BTW) what is the real difference in code size? Not that
great I don't think.
Regards,
Richard.
+ http://www.FreeRTOS .org
17 official architecture ports, more than 6000 downloads per month.
+ http://www.SafeRTOS .com
Certified by T as meeting the requirements for safety related systems.
Reply by ●August 21, 20082008-08-21
Greetings All:
I have used Rowley's CrossWorks and Keil with ARM processors plus a
variety of IDEs for other platforms. I think Rowley's CrossWorks is the
best IDE I have ever used and I have found their support has been just
excellent! The current application I am working on has a compiled code
size of about 100KB. It includes an FIQ ISR written in ASM which
CrossWorks integrated nicely into the rest of the code written in C.
--
Best Regards,
Tom Alldread
t...@telus.net
I have used Rowley's CrossWorks and Keil with ARM processors plus a
variety of IDEs for other platforms. I think Rowley's CrossWorks is the
best IDE I have ever used and I have found their support has been just
excellent! The current application I am working on has a compiled code
size of about 100KB. It includes an FIQ ISR written in ASM which
CrossWorks integrated nicely into the rest of the code written in C.
--
Best Regards,
Tom Alldread
t...@telus.net
Reply by ●August 21, 20082008-08-21
This topic seems to be very active!
I will put my vote for Yagarto (Eclipse+GCC+OCD).
Reasons:
* Im Windows user, with none (zero) Linux experience and my hair is
still fine after using Yagarto for two years.
* From the moment when the installation (simple and fast) is finished
to the moment when the first led blinks on a DevKit, im only spent 1
hour!
* There are severals threads in this forums that claim that GCC (used
with Optimizations on) are similar on code density to IAR and Keil.
By the way, with 512Kb of FLASH on LPC2148 there is no much "space"
for discussion (but depends on your project)
* I want to say again that im refuse to use console-like soft, hard-
to-get-working IDE's, and Yagarto has been great for me. Eclipse is
used to create soft on JAVA and C/C++ all over the world (these
people are very 'clic-and-go' lovers), and works grat with GCC for
ARM. The entire creation process of firmware for LPC's is based on
nice graphical interface, and the results are just great.
I was a newbie almost from scratch. I download Yagarto, buy Olimex
DevKit, buy Olimex JTAG, read this forum, and get my Graphic LCD
display with SD Card and USB interface working in 3 weeks!
There are no horror stories about GCC, just a few advices that must
be read *before* start.
Just try Yagarto before spend $$. If you experiencie is negative then
start looking for IAR and Keil.
Gaspar Pollano
I will put my vote for Yagarto (Eclipse+GCC+OCD).
Reasons:
* Im Windows user, with none (zero) Linux experience and my hair is
still fine after using Yagarto for two years.
* From the moment when the installation (simple and fast) is finished
to the moment when the first led blinks on a DevKit, im only spent 1
hour!
* There are severals threads in this forums that claim that GCC (used
with Optimizations on) are similar on code density to IAR and Keil.
By the way, with 512Kb of FLASH on LPC2148 there is no much "space"
for discussion (but depends on your project)
* I want to say again that im refuse to use console-like soft, hard-
to-get-working IDE's, and Yagarto has been great for me. Eclipse is
used to create soft on JAVA and C/C++ all over the world (these
people are very 'clic-and-go' lovers), and works grat with GCC for
ARM. The entire creation process of firmware for LPC's is based on
nice graphical interface, and the results are just great.
I was a newbie almost from scratch. I download Yagarto, buy Olimex
DevKit, buy Olimex JTAG, read this forum, and get my Graphic LCD
display with SD Card and USB interface working in 3 weeks!
There are no horror stories about GCC, just a few advices that must
be read *before* start.
Just try Yagarto before spend $$. If you experiencie is negative then
start looking for IAR and Keil.
Gaspar Pollano
