What was the rationale for such a decision?

Regards
Michael

Message: 7
   Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:32:46 -0000
   From: "andnan" <andnan@andn...>
Subject: Porting project to GCC from AQ430.

Well, our company may be moving to the GCC tool chain from AQ430.  
Basically, it is a management decision of which I have no control 
over (not that I'm opposed to the GCC tool chain).

So, I have a project which is about 60% finished, totally in assembly 
and I need to change assemblers.  Where can I get detailed info on 
the binutils for the msp so I can port the assembler specific stuff?  
I guess I need to make a make file and all that as well. 

An example of a mspgcc project with a make file would be quite 
useful.  Anyone got a link for me?

Funny you should ask. I immediately e-mailed the poster, to make sure 
that the reason was not dissatisfaction with AQ430. I will let him 
answer here if he cares to, but I was happy (and not surprised ;-)) 
to find out that the reason had nothing to do with the tools he was 
currently using.

Michel

--- In msp430@msp4..., "Michael Johnson" <mpj@r...> wrote:
> What was the rationale for such a decision?
> 
> Regards
> Michael
> 
> Message: 7
>    Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:32:46 -0000
>    From: "andnan" <andnan@y...>
> Subject: Porting project to GCC from AQ430.
> 
> Well, our company may be moving to the GCC tool chain from AQ430.  
> Basically, it is a management decision of which I have no control 
> over (not that I'm opposed to the GCC tool chain).
> 
> So, I have a project which is about 60% finished, totally in 
assembly 
> and I need to change assemblers.  Where can I get
detailed info on 
> the binutils for the msp so I can port the assembler specific 
stuff?  
> I guess I need to make a make file and all that as
well. 
> 
> An example of a mspgcc project with a make file would be quite 
> useful.  Anyone got a link for me?

Michel, 

I think you are doing a great job. 
It took me about 2 days to get into the processor details plus the AQ430 - the 
learning curve is almost vertical. 
I have so far had no trouble whatsoever with the compiler or debugger
environment. 
I used it for a 5-day shot at making a 6 channel, 400kHz/ch photon counter for
xray 
backscatter. (European military project.). Got a few unpopulated boards from the

great people at SoftBaugh and handbuilt them to specs after programming the app 
on their demo board. It worked like a dream almost right away and I had 2 days
to 
clean up, add features, make a test rig and test everything thoroughly. And I
saved 
the rush charge on UPS. A pleasant and unusual experience of bagging another 
processor.

The GCC would puzzle me a bit for professional development. We are after all 
talking about ANSI C with high portability. The real issue should be
productivity. 
Granted, I stuck to command line utilities for quite a while myself. It just
seemed 
that typing commands were so much faster and precise. But this nuisance of 
Windows 3.1 unfortunately did not go away. I think it is here to stay like like
other 
obsolete inventions like the rubber mop and the automobile. 

Merry Christmas !!
Kent

> Funny you should ask. I immediately e-mailed the
poster, to make sure 
> that the reason was not dissatisfaction with AQ430. I will let him 
> answer here if he cares to, but I was happy (and not surprised ;-)) 
> to find out that the reason had nothing to do with the tools he was 
> currently using.
> 
> Michel
> 
> --- In msp430@msp4..., "Michael Johnson" <mpj@r...> wrote:
> > What was the rationale for such a decision?
> > 
> > Regards
> > Michael
> > 
> > Message: 7
> > Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:32:46 -0000
> > From: "andnan" <andnan@y...>
> > Subject: Porting project to GCC from AQ430.
> > 
> > Well, our company may be moving to the GCC tool chain from AQ430. 
> > Basically, it is a management decision of which I have no control 
> > over (not that I'm opposed to the GCC tool chain).
> > 
> > So, I have a project which is about 60% finished, totally in 
> assembly 
> > and I need to change assemblers. Where can I get detailed info on 
> > the binutils for the msp so I can port the assembler specific 
> stuff? 
> > I guess I need to make a make file and all that as well. 
> > 
> > An example of a mspgcc project with a make file would be quite 
> > useful. Anyone got a link for me?
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
>                        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> 
>                                  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . 
> 

Here's a copy of the email I got from Michel and my reply.....


To: "michelqv" <michel@mich...>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 11:53 AM
Subject: Re: Port to mspgcc from AQ430


> I am completely happy with Aq430.  I have found
the
> support to be exceptional and the compiler to be
> solid.
>
> Our company was bought by AMRIX.  They have a
> development philosophy of using the GCC tool chain for
> development if there is a port for the target
> processor.  It has not been determined yet, but  I
> suspect that we will be TOLD to use the GCC tool
> chain.
>
> I'd rather keep using AQ430, but I will not get to
> make that decision.  As a result, I'd like to get a
> head start and have a gcc port ready.
>
>
> --- michelqv <michel@mich...> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Are you unhappy with AQ430...
> > We would really like to know your reasons for the
> > migration, and
> > would do our best to change your mind if possible!
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Michel
> >
> >
>
>
> ====> Andrew Barnes P.Eng


--- In msp430@msp4..., "Kent Johansen" <kent@a...> wrote:
> Michel, 
> 
> I think you are doing a great job. 
> It took me about 2 days to get into the processor details plus the 
AQ430 - the 
> learning curve is almost vertical. 
> I have so far had no trouble whatsoever with the compiler or 
debugger environment. 
> I used it for a 5-day shot at making a 6 channel,
400kHz/ch photon 
counter for xray 
> backscatter. (European military project.). Got a
few unpopulated 
boards from the 
> great people at SoftBaugh and handbuilt them to
specs after 
programming the app 
> on their demo board. It worked like a dream almost
right away and I 
had 2 days to 
> clean up, add features, make a test rig and test
everything 
thoroughly. And I saved 
> the rush charge on UPS. A pleasant and unusual
experience of 
bagging another 
> processor.
> 
> The GCC would puzzle me a bit for professional development. We are 
after all 
> talking about ANSI C with high portability. The
real issue should 
be productivity. 
> Granted, I stuck to command line utilities for
quite a while 
myself. It just seemed 
> that typing commands were so much faster and
precise. But this 
nuisance of 
> Windows 3.1 unfortunately did not go away. I think
it is here to 
stay like like other 
> obsolete inventions like the rubber mop and the
automobile. 
> 
> Merry Christmas !!
> Kent
> 
> > Funny you should ask. I immediately e-mailed the poster, to make 
sure 
> > that the reason was not dissatisfaction with
AQ430. I will let 
him 
> > answer here if he cares to, but I was happy
(and not surprised ;-
)) 
> > to find out that the reason had nothing to do
with the tools he 
was 
> > currently using.
> > 
> > Michel
> > 
> > --- In msp430@msp4..., "Michael Johnson" <mpj@r...>
wrote:
> > > What was the rationale for such a decision?
> > > 
> > > Regards
> > > Michael
> > > 
> > > Message: 7
> > > Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:32:46 -0000
> > > From: "andnan" <andnan@y...>
> > > Subject: Porting project to GCC from AQ430.
> > > 
> > > Well, our company may be moving to the GCC tool chain from 
AQ430. 
> > > Basically, it is a management decision
of which I have no 
control 
> > > over (not that I'm opposed to the
GCC tool chain).
> > > 
> > > So, I have a project which is about 60% finished, totally in 
> > assembly 
> > > and I need to change assemblers. Where can I get detailed info 
on 
> > > the binutils for the msp so I can port
the assembler specific 
> > stuff? 
> > > I guess I need to make a make file and all that as well. 
> > > 
> > > An example of a mspgcc project with a make file would be quite 
> > > useful. Anyone got a link for me?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > .
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >                        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > 
> >                                  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > *   To visit your group on the web, go to:
> >     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/msp430/
> >     
> > *   .
> >     
> > *   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of 
Service. 
> >