Asm source code page?

Started by "Cra...@saers.com [msp430]" January 10, 2016
Hi,
In summer 2013 I found a web page full of what I remember as being
dozens of MSP430 assembly source code files, probably all open
source. I believe it was on a TI page. I downloaded and used the
16x16->32 bit multiply and 32/16 bit divide routines, and I thought I
had carefully bookmarked this very special page. Now I can't find the
bookmark, or the page in hours of searching. Anybody know where it
is, or have any other ideas for web pages of sample code in Asm?
Thanks,
Craig
http://www.TurquoiseEnergy.com/
http://www.saers.com/recorder/craig/TENewsV2/ - Radiant energy
project with MSP430G2553, issues #94, #95 (#96 next).

Posted by: Craig Carmichael




Beginning Microcontrollers with the MSP430

I have a very old document from 2001 with various notes and examples in
assembler, called APP_14306. there are loads of other app notes (mostly
older) that are in assembler, there are alos lots of files posted on the
yahoo group in assembler. What specifically are you looking for? To
learn assembler, a specific app note etc. I write almost exclusively in
assembler for most micros, including the MSP430, but that seems to be
rare enough for most manuafacturers, including Ti to have stopped
supporting the use of assembler in their app notes.

Al

On 10/01/2016 5:17 PM, Craig Carmichael c...@saers.com [msp430] wrote:
> Hi,
> In summer 2013 I found a web page full of what I remember as being
> dozens of MSP430 assembly source code files, probably all open
> source. I believe it was on a TI page. I downloaded and used the
> 16x16->32 bit multiply and 32/16 bit divide routines, and I thought I
> had carefully bookmarked this very special page. Now I can't find the
> bookmark, or the page in hours of searching. Anybody know where it
> is, or have any other ideas for web pages of sample code in Asm?
> Thanks,
> Craig
> http://www.TurquoiseEnergy.com/
> http://www.saers.com/recorder/craig/TENewsV2/ - Radiant energy
> project with MSP430G2553, issues #94, #95 (#96 next).
>
> Posted by: Craig Carmichael
>
>
>
> Yahoo Groups Links
On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 22:47:23 -0800, Craig Carmichael wrote:

>In summer 2013 I found a web page full of what I remember as being
>dozens of MSP430 assembly source code files, probably all open
>source.

I'd normally rely on Onestone to provide you with the better
link here. He uses assembly coding a lot.

However, it's possible that the site you are thinking about
has either moved or has been removed.

When the MSP430 was first fielded, there would naturally be
more interest in assembly since the C compilers were still
being developed and didn't offer a similar wide array of
options that they did, later on. Today, too few do any
project entirely in assembly (I still do, sometimes; but most
projects I do [regardless of processor, actually] are a
mixture of C and assembly.) Times change, both broadly
speaking as well as within the maturity cycles of specific
processors/families.

>I believe it was on a TI page. I downloaded and used the
>16x16->32 bit multiply and 32/16 bit divide routines,

I've posted up several different division routines, both
integer and floating point and for various size words, which
are free for anyone to use and are amongst the faster such
routines you should find (at least, for earlier MSP430
incarnations.) They come in loop and unrolled loop versions.
But it sounds as though you may be looking for other things
right now. Still, if you want that too, I can send them
along. But they are for the IAR assembler tool (though I've
adapted such code for ImageCraft's tools, too.)

>and I thought I
>had carefully bookmarked this very special page. Now I can't find the
>bookmark, or the page in hours of searching. Anybody know where it
>is, or have any other ideas for web pages of sample code in Asm?

Whose assembler are you planning to use? It matters some.

(Not that I have a horde of web sites to recommend. But
anyone offering you web pages of sample source code in
assembler may want to know which assembler you plan to use.
It helps to know before offering something useful.)

What are your goals here? Learning assembly, generally?
Learning to use some specific assembler? Learning to
integrate assembly code with C code? What IDE, as well?

Jon

Posted by: Jon Kirwan




Hi Craig,

go to ti.com/msp430
then select the Tools&Software Tab
you will be here:( http://www.ti.com/lsds/ti/microcontrollers_16-bit_32-
bit/msp/tools_software.page )

scroll down (80%) to "code examples"
and click on the link for your controller.
(searching on the TI Webpage is more and more like searching for a Easter
Egg;-)

Matthias

"Craig Carmichael c...@saers.com [msp430]" :

> Hi,
> In summer 2013 I found a web page full of what I remember as being
> dozens of MSP430 assembly source code files, probably all open
> source. I believe it was on a TI page. I downloaded and used the
> 16x16->32 bit multiply and 32/16 bit divide routines, and I thought I
> had carefully bookmarked this very special page. Now I can't find the
> bookmark, or the page in hours of searching. Anybody know where it
> is, or have any other ideas for web pages of sample code in Asm?
> Thanks,
> Craig
> http://www.TurquoiseEnergy.com/
> http://www.saers.com/recorder/craig/TENewsV2/ - Radiant energy
> project with MSP430G2553, issues #94, #95 (#96 next).
>
> Posted by: Craig Carmichael
>
>


Posted by: Matthias Weingart




I agree Matthias, every time Ti 'updates' its page they make it even
more inscrutable and difficult to use. I rarely go there any more.

Al

On 11/01/2016 8:38 AM, Matthias Weingart g...@pentax.boerde.de [msp430]
wrote:
> Hi Craig,
>
> go to ti.com/msp430
> then select the Tools&Software Tab
> you will be here:( http://www.ti.com/lsds/ti/microcontrollers_16-bit_32-
> bit/msp/tools_software.page )
>
> scroll down (80%) to "code examples"
> and click on the link for your controller.
> (searching on the TI Webpage is more and more like searching for a Easter
> Egg;-)
>
> Matthias
>
> "Craig Carmichael c...@saers.com [msp430]" :
>
>> Hi,
>> In summer 2013 I found a web page full of what I remember as being
>> dozens of MSP430 assembly source code files, probably all open
>> source. I believe it was on a TI page. I downloaded and used the
>> 16x16->32 bit multiply and 32/16 bit divide routines, and I thought I
>> had carefully bookmarked this very special page. Now I can't find the
>> bookmark, or the page in hours of searching. Anybody know where it
>> is, or have any other ideas for web pages of sample code in Asm?
>> Thanks,
>> Craig
>> http://www.TurquoiseEnergy.com/
>> http://www.saers.com/recorder/craig/TENewsV2/ - Radiant energy
>> project with MSP430G2553, issues #94, #95 (#96 next).
>>
>> Posted by: Craig Carmichael
>>
>>
> Posted by: Matthias Weingart
>
>
>
> Yahoo Groups Links
On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 22:47:23 -0800, Craig Carmichael wrote:

>... ideas for web pages of sample code in Asm?

Just as an additional note...

If you are interested in writing assembly-only projects for
the MSP430 and MSP430X families, I'd recommend using IAR's
Kickstart tools. Their assembler is quite general-purpose and
does NOT have any code size limitations at all. See:

http://supp.iar.com/FilesPublic/UPDINFO/004578/infocenter/product_packages.html

where the 2nd bullet under the Kickstart heading says, "The
IAR Assembler delivered is the full version without any
restrictions" and the 3rd bullet expands, "The IAR XLINK
Linker will link ... an unlimited amount of code originating
from assembly code." (The 4th bullet adds, "The IAR KickStart
C-SPY Simulator ... is unlimited in the amount of assembly
code read.") This pretty much means you get an excellent
assembler/linker toolset, plus a very nice IDE and debugger
for coding purposes and ZERO cost to you. I've used IAR for
assembly coding development and I really like the tools a
lot, as they present a very clean, orthogonal design with all
the features you need. Other assembler tools I've used, off
and on, tend to have odd "limitations" which are frustrating
at times. IAR's tools "just work well." Never wished for a
feature that I couldn't already find in IAR's assembler +
linker toolset.

You can also explore C/C++ with IAR's tools, but the free
Kickstart version does limit your final application size.
IAR asks a "fairly high price" for unlimited C/C++ code
sizes. If you do plan on mixing C and assembly and plan on
developing larger applications then you should consider other
tools for a cost/benefit analysis. A starting point might be
TI's page here:

http://www.ti.com/lsds/ti/microcontrollers_16-bit_32-bit/msp/tools_software.page

However, be aware that this page in no way provides all your
options. Rowley and ImageCraft are just two such examples
that you don't see there:

http://www.rowley.co.uk/msp430/
https://www.imagecraft.com/devtools_MSP430.html

I'm sure there are others, as well, that aren't included in
the TI page.

If you are doing this all as a hobby, then you are free to
make your own choices about assembly-only or mixed coding
styles. Whatever makes you happy works just fine.

If you have your own product/product-line in mind, then you
need to be aware of licensing issues (libraries used, as well
as compiler generated output) for the tools you apply. I
believe you can use the IAR assembler/linker toolchain for
commercial products without paying them a fee, so long as you
are careful about library use (not using any library other
than public domain would be safer.) It sounds like you might
be in this frame of mind, but it is hard to tell.

For professional contract work, you will want to be able to
support mixed assembly and C/C++. Clients deserve to have the
widest range of options available for their project
development so that the overall development process can be
optimized for them, weighing all conditions appropriate to
their circumstances. You should then carefully study the
various commercial options. But you should ALSO contact the
vendors, too, and speak or write to a human there and get a
feel for what contact and support will be like after you buy
their tools. Most MSP430 vendors should be pretty good, I
think. But it helps to make contact and see how things play
out before making a final decision and spending your money.

As an employee in an organization with more than one
programmer, which does NOT sound like your situation, you do
what has been established by careful consideration of your
team members. If you are a sole employee, then I suppose you
get to make your own choices but you need to make them well
for those depending on you.
\
Jon

Posted by: Jon Kirwan




I Totally agree with Jon. IAR's assembler is excellent, does everything
I want, is unlimited, is free, and since I don't use any libraries from
third parties there are no royalty issues. The IDE is straightforward,
and quite good. It used to do some strange things, but they seem to have
been cleaned up over the years, either that or I subconsciously avoid
them! I find the syntax is more in line with the vast majority of
assemblers I've used over the last too many years, no strange things.
Their header files for each processor are also quite good, but large
because they are general use for C, c++ and assembler, so I personally
always clean out all the stuff I am unlikely to use, add some stuff that
I personally like to use, and rename the file, so I have an original
version incase I ever decide to mix assembly and C for example.

Cheers

Al

On 11/01/2016 6:15 AM, Jon Kirwan j...@infinitefactors.org [msp430] wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 22:47:23 -0800, Craig Carmichael wrote:
>
>> ... ideas for web pages of sample code in Asm?
> Just as an additional note...
>
> If you are interested in writing assembly-only projects for
> the MSP430 and MSP430X families, I'd recommend using IAR's
> Kickstart tools. Their assembler is quite general-purpose and
> does NOT have any code size limitations at all. See:
>
> http://supp.iar.com/FilesPublic/UPDINFO/004578/infocenter/product_packages.html
>
> where the 2nd bullet under the Kickstart heading says, "The
> IAR Assembler delivered is the full version without any
> restrictions" and the 3rd bullet expands, "The IAR XLINK
> Linker will link ... an unlimited amount of code originating
> from assembly code." (The 4th bullet adds, "The IAR KickStart
> C-SPY Simulator ... is unlimited in the amount of assembly
> code read.") This pretty much means you get an excellent
> assembler/linker toolset, plus a very nice IDE and debugger
> for coding purposes and ZERO cost to you. I've used IAR for
> assembly coding development and I really like the tools a
> lot, as they present a very clean, orthogonal design with all
> the features you need. Other assembler tools I've used, off
> and on, tend to have odd "limitations" which are frustrating
> at times. IAR's tools "just work well." Never wished for a
> feature that I couldn't already find in IAR's assembler +
> linker toolset.
>
> You can also explore C/C++ with IAR's tools, but the free
> Kickstart version does limit your final application size.
> IAR asks a "fairly high price" for unlimited C/C++ code
> sizes. If you do plan on mixing C and assembly and plan on
> developing larger applications then you should consider other
> tools for a cost/benefit analysis. A starting point might be
> TI's page here:
>
> http://www.ti.com/lsds/ti/microcontrollers_16-bit_32-bit/msp/tools_software.page
>
> However, be aware that this page in no way provides all your
> options. Rowley and ImageCraft are just two such examples
> that you don't see there:
>
> http://www.rowley.co.uk/msp430/
> https://www.imagecraft.com/devtools_MSP430.html
>
> I'm sure there are others, as well, that aren't included in
> the TI page.
>
> If you are doing this all as a hobby, then you are free to
> make your own choices about assembly-only or mixed coding
> styles. Whatever makes you happy works just fine.
>
> If you have your own product/product-line in mind, then you
> need to be aware of licensing issues (libraries used, as well
> as compiler generated output) for the tools you apply. I
> believe you can use the IAR assembler/linker toolchain for
> commercial products without paying them a fee, so long as you
> are careful about library use (not using any library other
> than public domain would be safer.) It sounds like you might
> be in this frame of mind, but it is hard to tell.
>
> For professional contract work, you will want to be able to
> support mixed assembly and C/C++. Clients deserve to have the
> widest range of options available for their project
> development so that the overall development process can be
> optimized for them, weighing all conditions appropriate to
> their circumstances. You should then carefully study the
> various commercial options. But you should ALSO contact the
> vendors, too, and speak or write to a human there and get a
> feel for what contact and support will be like after you buy
> their tools. Most MSP430 vendors should be pretty good, I
> think. But it helps to make contact and see how things play
> out before making a final decision and spending your money.
>
> As an employee in an organization with more than one
> programmer, which does NOT sound like your situation, you do
> what has been established by careful consideration of your
> team members. If you are a sole employee, then I suppose you
> get to make your own choices but you need to make them well
> for those depending on you.
> \
> Jon
>
> Posted by: Jon Kirwan
>
>
>
> Yahoo Groups Links
On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 19:33:47 +1030, Al wrote:

>I Totally agree with Jon.

:)

>IAR's assembler is excellent, does everything
>I want, is unlimited, is free, and since I don't use any libraries from
>third parties there are no royalty issues.

That assembler and linker tool-pair is good. I've used a LOT
of assemblers in my life and have written a few, as well.
This one from IAR is about as good as assemblers for micros
usually get. The abstract segmentation model is great. The
macro facility could be better, but I consider it "good
enough for most things." (I can also use M4 or some other
tool on the source where I feel there are some limitations.
Such tools won't be fluent with the semantics but they may be
fruitfully used. I just haven't felt enough of a need yet,
since IAR's capabilities are good enough for now.)

>The IDE is straightforward, and quite good.

It's remarkably easy to get started using and remains very
capable as you advance further over time. It just wears well
over time. They've done a very good job on its design. And,
fortunately for some of us, have decided to offer a fully
functional toolset for assembler programmers at no charge.
I'm in debt to them for this fact.

(I'm also in debt for another reason -- I've never needed
more than an additional 4k of C generated code for an MSP430
project, so the KickStart has been "good enough" for all my
project uses so far.)

>It used to do some strange things, but they seem to have
>been cleaned up over the years, either that or I subconsciously avoid
>them!

I haven't found anything that was "strange." I have found
things that took a moment to consider before I fully
understood them. But once I gathered up the conceptual model
they made good sense to me.

The only "strange" things are things I've done myself with
their toolset. For example, I needed a way to find the
largest common divisor for a pair of configuration parameters
to help me set up a clocking system that would serve two
purposes at once with only integer multiplier differences in
their operation. I hacked up a MACRO tool to do exactly that,
too. Worked perfectly. Now, someone looking at it would see
"strange" there, I suppose. But that's my fault, not IARs!

>I find the syntax is more in line with the vast majority of
>assemblers I've used over the last too many years, no strange things.

That's pretty much my feeling, too.

>Their header files for each processor are also quite good, but large
>because they are general use for C, c++ and assembler, so I personally
>always clean out all the stuff I am unlikely to use, add some stuff that
>I personally like to use, and rename the file, so I have an original
>version incase I ever decide to mix assembly and C for example.

Hmm. So far, I've not bothered with that. In part, perhaps,
because I haven't done as much as you have and haven't
reached a situation where the trouble would have been worth
it. In part, perhaps, because I tend not to change standard
facilities unless I can clearly justify the change. I'd
rather use an additional file I create and add it to the
inclusion list. But again, you probably have a wider array of
usages than I do and I may very well have made similar
choices if I had faced similar situations, too.

Jon

>Cheers
>
>Al
>
>On 11/01/2016 6:15 AM, Jon Kirwan j...@infinitefactors.org [msp430] wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 22:47:23 -0800, Craig Carmichael wrote:
>>
>>> ... ideas for web pages of sample code in Asm?
>> Just as an additional note...
>>
>> If you are interested in writing assembly-only projects for
>> the MSP430 and MSP430X families, I'd recommend using IAR's
>> Kickstart tools. Their assembler is quite general-purpose and
>> does NOT have any code size limitations at all. See:
>>
>> http://supp.iar.com/FilesPublic/UPDINFO/004578/infocenter/product_packages.html
>>
>> where the 2nd bullet under the Kickstart heading says, "The
>> IAR Assembler delivered is the full version without any
>> restrictions" and the 3rd bullet expands, "The IAR XLINK
>> Linker will link ... an unlimited amount of code originating
>> from assembly code." (The 4th bullet adds, "The IAR KickStart
>> C-SPY Simulator ... is unlimited in the amount of assembly
>> code read.") This pretty much means you get an excellent
>> assembler/linker toolset, plus a very nice IDE and debugger
>> for coding purposes and ZERO cost to you. I've used IAR for
>> assembly coding development and I really like the tools a
>> lot, as they present a very clean, orthogonal design with all
>> the features you need. Other assembler tools I've used, off
>> and on, tend to have odd "limitations" which are frustrating
>> at times. IAR's tools "just work well." Never wished for a
>> feature that I couldn't already find in IAR's assembler +
>> linker toolset.
>>
>> You can also explore C/C++ with IAR's tools, but the free
>> Kickstart version does limit your final application size.
>> IAR asks a "fairly high price" for unlimited C/C++ code
>> sizes. If you do plan on mixing C and assembly and plan on
>> developing larger applications then you should consider other
>> tools for a cost/benefit analysis. A starting point might be
>> TI's page here:
>>
>> http://www.ti.com/lsds/ti/microcontrollers_16-bit_32-bit/msp/tools_software.page
>>
>> However, be aware that this page in no way provides all your
>> options. Rowley and ImageCraft are just two such examples
>> that you don't see there:
>>
>> http://www.rowley.co.uk/msp430/
>> https://www.imagecraft.com/devtools_MSP430.html
>>
>> I'm sure there are others, as well, that aren't included in
>> the TI page.
>>
>> If you are doing this all as a hobby, then you are free to
>> make your own choices about assembly-only or mixed coding
>> styles. Whatever makes you happy works just fine.
>>
>> If you have your own product/product-line in mind, then you
>> need to be aware of licensing issues (libraries used, as well
>> as compiler generated output) for the tools you apply. I
>> believe you can use the IAR assembler/linker toolchain for
>> commercial products without paying them a fee, so long as you
>> are careful about library use (not using any library other
>> than public domain would be safer.) It sounds like you might
>> be in this frame of mind, but it is hard to tell.
>>
>> For professional contract work, you will want to be able to
>> support mixed assembly and C/C++. Clients deserve to have the
>> widest range of options available for their project
>> development so that the overall development process can be
>> optimized for them, weighing all conditions appropriate to
>> their circumstances. You should then carefully study the
>> various commercial options. But you should ALSO contact the
>> vendors, too, and speak or write to a human there and get a
>> feel for what contact and support will be like after you buy
>> their tools. Most MSP430 vendors should be pretty good, I
>> think. But it helps to make contact and see how things play
>> out before making a final decision and spending your money.
>>
>> As an employee in an organization with more than one
>> programmer, which does NOT sound like your situation, you do
>> what has been established by careful consideration of your
>> team members. If you are a sole employee, then I suppose you
>> get to make your own choices but you need to make them well
>> for those depending on you.
>>
>> Jon

Posted by: Jon Kirwan




Hi Jon, the strange stuff I talk about was a tendency to crash if you
disconnected power from the target unit accidentally. Or to lose lose
contact and have to be reset or restarted if the USB lost contact. I
even had one version that would crash my computer regularly. I tested
all of these across at least 2 machines and a laptop, but that was a
long time ago. It has been solid for quite a few years now. In the very
early days of the flash parts you actually had to match the Kickstart
version to the batch number, but that was mostly cured when Ti moved
from the clunky old serial port JTAG to the USB one.

I too am extremely grateful to IAR for fielding such a well rounded tool
for free for all these years. I have written hundreds of programs using
it, and mostly it has been a very enjoyable process for me.

Al

On 12/01/2016 7:59 AM, Jon Kirwan j...@infinitefactors.org [msp430] wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 19:33:47 +1030, Al wrote:
>
>> I Totally agree with Jon.
> :)
>
>> IAR's assembler is excellent, does everything
>> I want, is unlimited, is free, and since I don't use any libraries from
>> third parties there are no royalty issues.
> That assembler and linker tool-pair is good. I've used a LOT
> of assemblers in my life and have written a few, as well.
> This one from IAR is about as good as assemblers for micros
> usually get. The abstract segmentation model is great. The
> macro facility could be better, but I consider it "good
> enough for most things." (I can also use M4 or some other
> tool on the source where I feel there are some limitations.
> Such tools won't be fluent with the semantics but they may be
> fruitfully used. I just haven't felt enough of a need yet,
> since IAR's capabilities are good enough for now.)
>
>> The IDE is straightforward, and quite good.
> It's remarkably easy to get started using and remains very
> capable as you advance further over time. It just wears well
> over time. They've done a very good job on its design. And,
> fortunately for some of us, have decided to offer a fully
> functional toolset for assembler programmers at no charge.
> I'm in debt to them for this fact.
>
> (I'm also in debt for another reason -- I've never needed
> more than an additional 4k of C generated code for an MSP430
> project, so the KickStart has been "good enough" for all my
> project uses so far.)
>
>> It used to do some strange things, but they seem to have
>> been cleaned up over the years, either that or I subconsciously avoid
>> them!
> I haven't found anything that was "strange." I have found
> things that took a moment to consider before I fully
> understood them. But once I gathered up the conceptual model
> they made good sense to me.
>
> The only "strange" things are things I've done myself with
> their toolset. For example, I needed a way to find the
> largest common divisor for a pair of configuration parameters
> to help me set up a clocking system that would serve two
> purposes at once with only integer multiplier differences in
> their operation. I hacked up a MACRO tool to do exactly that,
> too. Worked perfectly. Now, someone looking at it would see
> "strange" there, I suppose. But that's my fault, not IARs!
>
>> I find the syntax is more in line with the vast majority of
>> assemblers I've used over the last too many years, no strange things.
> That's pretty much my feeling, too.
>
>> Their header files for each processor are also quite good, but large
>> because they are general use for C, c++ and assembler, so I personally
>> always clean out all the stuff I am unlikely to use, add some stuff that
>> I personally like to use, and rename the file, so I have an original
>> version incase I ever decide to mix assembly and C for example.
> Hmm. So far, I've not bothered with that. In part, perhaps,
> because I haven't done as much as you have and haven't
> reached a situation where the trouble would have been worth
> it. In part, perhaps, because I tend not to change standard
> facilities unless I can clearly justify the change. I'd
> rather use an additional file I create and add it to the
> inclusion list. But again, you probably have a wider array of
> usages than I do and I may very well have made similar
> choices if I had faced similar situations, too.
>
> Jon
>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Al
>>
>> On 11/01/2016 6:15 AM, Jon Kirwan j...@infinitefactors.org [msp430] wrote:
>>> On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 22:47:23 -0800, Craig Carmichael wrote:
>>>
>>>> ... ideas for web pages of sample code in Asm?
>>> Just as an additional note...
>>>
>>> If you are interested in writing assembly-only projects for
>>> the MSP430 and MSP430X families, I'd recommend using IAR's
>>> Kickstart tools. Their assembler is quite general-purpose and
>>> does NOT have any code size limitations at all. See:
>>>
>>> http://supp.iar.com/FilesPublic/UPDINFO/004578/infocenter/product_packages.html
>>>
>>> where the 2nd bullet under the Kickstart heading says, "The
>>> IAR Assembler delivered is the full version without any
>>> restrictions" and the 3rd bullet expands, "The IAR XLINK
>>> Linker will link ... an unlimited amount of code originating
>>> from assembly code." (The 4th bullet adds, "The IAR KickStart
>>> C-SPY Simulator ... is unlimited in the amount of assembly
>>> code read.") This pretty much means you get an excellent
>>> assembler/linker toolset, plus a very nice IDE and debugger
>>> for coding purposes and ZERO cost to you. I've used IAR for
>>> assembly coding development and I really like the tools a
>>> lot, as they present a very clean, orthogonal design with all
>>> the features you need. Other assembler tools I've used, off
>>> and on, tend to have odd "limitations" which are frustrating
>>> at times. IAR's tools "just work well." Never wished for a
>>> feature that I couldn't already find in IAR's assembler +
>>> linker toolset.
>>>
>>> You can also explore C/C++ with IAR's tools, but the free
>>> Kickstart version does limit your final application size.
>>> IAR asks a "fairly high price" for unlimited C/C++ code
>>> sizes. If you do plan on mixing C and assembly and plan on
>>> developing larger applications then you should consider other
>>> tools for a cost/benefit analysis. A starting point might be
>>> TI's page here:
>>>
>>> http://www.ti.com/lsds/ti/microcontrollers_16-bit_32-bit/msp/tools_software.page
>>>
>>> However, be aware that this page in no way provides all your
>>> options. Rowley and ImageCraft are just two such examples
>>> that you don't see there:
>>>
>>> http://www.rowley.co.uk/msp430/
>>> https://www.imagecraft.com/devtools_MSP430.html
>>>
>>> I'm sure there are others, as well, that aren't included in
>>> the TI page.
>>>
>>> If you are doing this all as a hobby, then you are free to
>>> make your own choices about assembly-only or mixed coding
>>> styles. Whatever makes you happy works just fine.
>>>
>>> If you have your own product/product-line in mind, then you
>>> need to be aware of licensing issues (libraries used, as well
>>> as compiler generated output) for the tools you apply. I
>>> believe you can use the IAR assembler/linker toolchain for
>>> commercial products without paying them a fee, so long as you
>>> are careful about library use (not using any library other
>>> than public domain would be safer.) It sounds like you might
>>> be in this frame of mind, but it is hard to tell.
>>>
>>> For professional contract work, you will want to be able to
>>> support mixed assembly and C/C++. Clients deserve to have the
>>> widest range of options available for their project
>>> development so that the overall development process can be
>>> optimized for them, weighing all conditions appropriate to
>>> their circumstances. You should then carefully study the
>>> various commercial options. But you should ALSO contact the
>>> vendors, too, and speak or write to a human there and get a
>>> feel for what contact and support will be like after you buy
>>> their tools. Most MSP430 vendors should be pretty good, I
>>> think. But it helps to make contact and see how things play
>>> out before making a final decision and spending your money.
>>>
>>> As an employee in an organization with more than one
>>> programmer, which does NOT sound like your situation, you do
>>> what has been established by careful consideration of your
>>> team members. If you are a sole employee, then I suppose you
>>> get to make your own choices but you need to make them well
>>> for those depending on you.
>>>
>>> Jon
>
>
> Posted by: Jon Kirwan
>
>
>
> Yahoo Groups Links
sorry for my jumping in
i had a crash and in 2 computers a very big storm with lightnings so everything is lost
but i have some programmed chips that i uploaded from them an image as TI-txt files
can i disassemble them with kickstart
i thank you for your consideration
Ezra

-----Original Message-----
From: Onestone o...@bigpond.net.au [msp430]
To: msp430
Sent: Tue, Jan 12, 2016 1:47 am
Subject: Re: [msp430] Asm source code page?

Hi Jon, the strange stuff I talk about was a tendency to crash if you disconnected power from the target unit accidentally. Or to lose lose contact and have to be reset or restarted if the USB lost contact. I even had one version that would crash my computer regularly. I tested all of these across at least 2 machines and a laptop, but that was a long time ago. It has been solid for quite a few years now. In the very early days of the flash parts you actually had to match the Kickstart version to the batch number, but that was mostly cured when Ti moved from the clunky old serial port JTAG to the USB one.

I too am extremely grateful to IAR for fielding such a well rounded tool for free for all these years. I have written hundreds of programs using it, and mostly it has been a very enjoyable process for me.

Al

On 12/01/2016 7:59 AM, Jon Kirwan j...@infinitefactors.org [msp430] wrote:

On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 19:33:47 +1030, Al wrote:

I Totally agree with Jon.

:)

IAR's assembler is excellent, does everything
I want, is unlimited, is free, and since I don't use any libraries from
third parties there are no royalty issues.

That assembler and linker tool-pair is good. I've used a LOT
of assemblers in my life and have written a few, as well.
This one from IAR is about as good as assemblers for micros
usually get. The abstract segmentation model is great. The
macro facility could be better, but I consider it "good
enough for most things." (I can also use M4 or some other
tool on the source where I feel there are some limitations.
Such tools won't be fluent with the semantics but they may be
fruitfully used. I just haven't felt enough of a need yet,
since IAR's capabilities are good enough for now.)

The IDE is straightforward, and quite good.

It's remarkably easy to get started using and remains very
capable as you advance further over time. It just wears well
over time. They've done a very good job on its design. And,
fortunately for some of us, have decided to offer a fully
functional toolset for assembler programmers at no charge.
I'm in debt to them for this fact.

(I'm also in debt for another reason -- I've never needed
more than an additional 4k of C generated code for an MSP430
project, so the KickStart has been "good enough" for all my
project uses so far.)

It used to do some strange things, but they seem to have
been cleaned up over the years, either that or I subconsciously avoid
them!

I haven't found anything that was "strange." I have found
things that took a moment to consider before I fully
understood them. But once I gathered up the conceptual model
they made good sense to me.

The only "strange" things are things I've done myself with
their toolset. For example, I needed a way to find the
largest common divisor for a pair of configuration parameters
to help me set up a clocking system that would serve two
purposes at once with only integer multiplier differences in
their operation. I hacked up a MACRO tool to do exactly that,
too. Worked perfectly. Now, someone looking at it would see
"strange" there, I suppose. But that's my fault, not IARs!

I find the syntax is more in line with the vast majority of
assemblers I've used over the last too many years, no strange things.

That's pretty much my feeling, too.

Their header files for each processor are also quite good, but large
because they are general use for C, c++ and assembler, so I personally
always clean out all the stuff I am unlikely to use, add some stuff that
I personally like to use, and rename the file, so I have an original
version incase I ever decide to mix assembly and C for example.

Hmm. So far, I've not bothered with that. In part, perhaps,
because I haven't done as much as you have and haven't
reached a situation where the trouble would have been worth
it. In part, perhaps, because I tend not to change standard
facilities unless I can clearly justify the change. I'd
rather use an additional file I create and add it to the
inclusion list. But again, you probably have a wider array of
usages than I do and I may very well have made similar
choices if I had faced similar situations, too.

Jon

Cheers

Al

On 11/01/2016 6:15 AM, Jon Kirwan j...@infinitefactors.org [msp430] wrote:

On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 22:47:23 -0800, Craig Carmichael wrote:

... ideas for web pages of sample code in Asm?

Just as an additional note...

If you are interested in writing assembly-only projects for
the MSP430 and MSP430X families, I'd recommend using IAR's
Kickstart tools. Their assembler is quite general-purpose and
does NOT have any code size limitations at all. See:

http://supp.iar.com/FilesPublic/UPDINFO/004578/infocenter/product_packages.html

where the 2nd bullet under the Kickstart heading says, "The
IAR Assembler delivered is the full version without any
restrictions" and the 3rd bullet expands, "The IAR XLINK
Linker will link ... an unlimited amount of code originating
from assembly code." (The 4th bullet adds, "The IAR KickStart
C-SPY Simulator ... is unlimited in the amount of assembly
code read.") This pretty much means you get an excellent
assembler/linker toolset, plus a very nice IDE and debugger
for coding purposes and ZERO cost to you. I've used IAR for
assembly coding development and I really like the tools a
lot, as they present a very clean, orthogonal design with all
the features you need. Other assembler tools I've used, off
and on, tend to have odd "limitations" which are frustrating
at times. IAR's tools "just work well." Never wished for a
feature that I couldn't already find in IAR's assembler +
linker toolset.

You can also explore C/C++ with IAR's tools, but the free
Kickstart version does limit your final application size.
IAR asks a "fairly high price" for unlimited C/C++ code
sizes. If you do plan on mixing C and assembly and plan on
developing larger applications then you should consider other
tools for a cost/benefit analysis. A starting point might be
TI's page here:

http://www.ti.com/lsds/ti/microcontrollers_16-bit_32-bit/msp/tools_software.page

However, be aware that this page in no way provides all your
options. Rowley and ImageCraft are just two such examples
that you don't see there:

http://www.rowley.co.uk/msp430/
https://www.imagecraft.com/devtools_MSP430.html

I'm sure there are others, as well, that aren't included in
the TI page.

If you are doing this all as a hobby, then you are free to
make your own choices about assembly-only or mixed coding
styles. Whatever makes you happy works just fine.

If you have your own product/product-line in mind, then you
need to be aware of licensing issues (libraries used, as well
as compiler generated output) for the tools you apply. I
believe you can use the IAR assembler/linker toolchain for
commercial products without paying them a fee, so long as you
are careful about library use (not using any library other
than public domain would be safer.) It sounds like you might
be in this frame of mind, but it is hard to tell.

For professional contract work, you will want to be able to
support mixed assembly and C/C++. Clients deserve to have the
widest range of options available for their project
development so that the overall development process can be
optimized for them, weighing all conditions appropriate to
their circumstances. You should then carefully study the
various commercial options. But you should ALSO contact the
vendors, too, and speak or write to a human there and get a
feel for what contact and support will be like after you buy
their tools. Most MSP430 vendors should be pretty good, I
think. But it helps to make contact and see how things play
out before making a final decision and spending your money.

As an employee in an organization with more than one
programmer, which does NOT sound like your situation, you do
what has been established by careful consideration of your
team members. If you are a sole employee, then I suppose you
get to make your own choices but you need to make them well
for those depending on you.

Jon


Posted by: Jon Kirwan




Yahoo Groups Links