Which C compiler would you recomend?
I've narrowed it down to these two as they are the ones which 
support doubles and long longs.

This question is also intended to get me through the SPAM filter 
screen quicker later on.

Thanks

>> Which C compiler would you recomend?
I've narrowed it down to these two as they are the ones which 
support doubles and long longs. <<

I've used both and would unreservedly recommend the Crossworks. It works
very 
well, the code is very, very easy to port from IAR and Crossworks is much 
cheaper. 

Also, technical help is much better from Rowley I have found. Very responsive. 
Rowley have got this USB JTAG interface to go with Crossworks as well which 
apparently is much quicker than the parallel port one. 

Cheers,

Rob

But which compiler generates faster and smaller code?
 
  _____  

From: Robert Wood [mailto:robert.wood@robe...] 
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 6:57 PM
To: msp430@msp4...
Subject: Re: [msp430] IAR or CrossWork
 
>> Which C compiler would you recomend?
I've narrowed it down to these two as they are the ones which 
support doubles and long longs. <<

I've used both and would unreservedly recommend the Crossworks. It works
very 
well, the code is very, very easy to port from IAR and Crossworks is
much 
cheaper. 

Also, technical help is much better from Rowley I have found. Very
responsive. 
Rowley have got this USB JTAG interface to go with Crossworks as well
which 
apparently is much quicker than the parallel port one. 

Cheers,

Rob


.







click here
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG9bsuhov/M)5196.4901138.6071305.3001176/
D=groups/S05005378:HM/EXP91836506/A!28215/R=0/SIGse96mf6/*htt
p:/companion.yahoo.com> 
 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M)5196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=group
s/S=:HM/A!28215/rand0211558> 
 
  _____  

> . 

I've been really happy with Quadravox's AQ430. Excellent support,
few
bugs and great tech support from them. Hmmm... just remembered I need
to renew my maintenance support (which is also very reasonably priced). 

I've tried Quadravox, Imagecraft, Rowley and IAR. They are all good
tools, but I think the first three are the best "bang for the buck",
they are professional quality tools and a good value.

Matt Pobursky
Maximum Performance Systems

On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 21:50:21 -0000, alienmsp430 wrote:
>Which C compiler would you recomend? I've narrowed it down to these
>two as they are the ones which support doubles and long longs.
>
>This question is also intended to get me through the SPAM filter
>screen quicker later on.

GCC supports long longs as well :-)

Shaun

-----Original Message-----
From: alienmsp430 [mailto:alienmsp430@alie...]
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 11:50 PM
To: msp430@msp4...
Subject: [msp430] IAR or CrossWork


Which C compiler would you recomend?
I've narrowed it down to these two as they are the ones which 
support doubles and long longs.

This question is also intended to get me through the SPAM filter 
screen quicker later on.

Thanks





.

 
Yahoo! Groups Links



 


NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY

The information contained in this e-mail message and in the documents
attached herewith (hereinafter "the message") is intended only for the
individual or the entity named above and is intended to be confidential.

The reading of the message or any retention, copying, dissemination,
distribution, disclosure of the existence of the message or of its contents,
or any other use of the message or any part thereof, by anyone other than
the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.  If you received this message
and you are not the intended recipient or agent responsible for the delivery
of this message to the intended recipient, please refrain from reading it
and notify us immediately by telephone +27 (11) 921-7900, so that we can
co-ordinate with you, erasure of the message.

Although this e-mail and its attachments are believed to be free of any
virus or other defect, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure
that they are virus-free, and no responsibility is accepted by this firm for
any loss or damage arising from receipt or use thereof.

Neither, only assembler can do that. ;@}

(Hi Paul)

Al

Leonard Braun wrote:
> But which compiler generates faster and smaller code?
>  
>   _____  
> 
> From: Robert Wood [mailto:robert.wood@robe...] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 6:57 PM
> To: msp430@msp4...
> Subject: Re: [msp430] IAR or CrossWork
>  
> 
>>>Which C compiler would you recomend?
> 
> I've narrowed it down to these two as they are the ones which 
> support doubles and long longs. <<
> 
> I've used both and would unreservedly recommend the Crossworks. It
works
> very 
> well, the code is very, very easy to port from IAR and Crossworks is
> much 
> cheaper. 
> 
> Also, technical help is much better from Rowley I have found. Very
> responsive. 
> Rowley have got this USB JTAG interface to go with Crossworks as well
> which 
> apparently is much quicker than the parallel port one. 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> click here
> <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG9bsuhov/M)5196.4901138.6071305.3001176/
> D=groups/S05005378:HM/EXP91836506/A!28215/R=0/SIGse96mf6/*htt
> p:/companion.yahoo.com> 
>  
> <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M)5196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=group
> s/S=:HM/A!28215/rand0211558> 
>  
>   _____  
> 
> > . 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 

Yeah, but does Quadravox support long long and 64-bit double?  This is
the nub.

-- Paul.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Pobursky [mailto:ccsuser@ccsu...]
> Sent: 06 August 2004 05:00
> To: msp430@msp4...
> Subject: Re: [msp430] IAR or CrossWork
> 
> 
> I've been really happy with Quadravox's AQ430. Excellent support,
few
> bugs and great tech support from them. Hmmm... just remembered I need
> to renew my maintenance support (which is also very 
> reasonably priced). 
> 
> I've tried Quadravox, Imagecraft, Rowley and IAR. They are all good
> tools, but I think the first three are the best "bang for the
buck",
> they are professional quality tools and a good value.
> 
> Matt Pobursky
> Maximum Performance Systems
> 
> On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 21:50:21 -0000, alienmsp430 wrote:
> >Which C compiler would you recomend? I've narrowed it down to
these
> >two as they are the ones which support doubles and long longs.
> >
> >This question is also intended to get me through the SPAM filter
> >screen quicker later on.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> --------------------~--> 
> Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/CFFolB/TM
> --------------------------
> ------~-> 
> 
> .
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 

Why not ask IAR that question?  TI have produced a set of benchmarks
that CrossWorks and IAR can compile, and we've submitted results to TI.
We have nothing to fear.

-- Paul.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leonard Braun [mailto:lbraun@lbra...]
> Sent: 06 August 2004 01:34
> To: msp430@msp4...
> Subject: RE: [msp430] IAR or CrossWork
> 
> 
> But which compiler generates faster and smaller code?
>  
>   _____  
> 
> From: Robert Wood [mailto:robert.wood@robe...] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 6:57 PM
> To: msp430@msp4...
> Subject: Re: [msp430] IAR or CrossWork
>  
> >> Which C compiler would you recomend?
> I've narrowed it down to these two as they are the ones which 
> support doubles and long longs. <<
> 
> I've used both and would unreservedly recommend the 
> Crossworks. It works
> very 
> well, the code is very, very easy to port from IAR and Crossworks is
> much 
> cheaper. 
> 
> Also, technical help is much better from Rowley I have found. Very
> responsive. 
> Rowley have got this USB JTAG interface to go with Crossworks as well
> which 
> apparently is much quicker than the parallel port one. 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> click here
> <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG9bsuhov/M)5196.4901138.607130
5.3001176/
D=groups/S05005378:HM/EXP91836506/A!28215/R=0/SIGse96mf6/*htt
p:/companion.yahoo.com> 
 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M)5196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=group
s/S=:HM/A!28215/rand0211558> 
 
  _____  

> . 







.

 
Yahoo! Groups Links



 

Leonard queried of IAR and Crossworks:

"But which compiler generates faster and smaller code?"

All I can offer is the fact that when I compiled the code for the project I 
ported, the IAR generated an Intel Standard file (which I assume is, and 
looks like, Intel Hex) of 27k. The Crossworks says 26.2k for the same format. 
Whether that proves anything I'm not sure.

Also, which one is faster I don't know, but I'm not sure I'd run
the MSP430 in 
time critical application! 

Cheers,

Rob

PS Al said and brought a broad grin to my face:

"Neither, only assembler can do that. ;@}"

Nice one, Al! :)






 
  _____  
 

The MNF Fortran IV compiler for the CDC6600 / CDC7600 minicomputer back in
the late 70s when operated in full aggressive compile
mode [13 passes, multi-hour compiles] was believed to produce more efficient
code than Assembler writers ... although how they
measured that I have no idea!

So I assume there must be some compilers nowadays [probably for the PC &
PowerPC] which can outrun Assembler writers even for small
programs.

regards,

Richard (UK)


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert Wood" <robert.wood@robe...>
To: <msp430@msp4...>
Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: [msp430] IAR or CrossWork


> Leonard queried of IAR and Crossworks:
>
> "But which compiler generates faster and smaller code?"
>
> All I can offer is the fact that when I compiled the code for the project I
> ported, the IAR generated an Intel Standard file (which I assume is, and
> looks like, Intel Hex) of 27k. The Crossworks says 26.2k for the same
format.
> Whether that proves anything I'm not sure.
>
> Also, which one is faster I don't know, but I'm not sure I'd
run the MSP430 in
> time critical application!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rob
>
> PS Al said and brought a broad grin to my face:
>
> "Neither, only assembler can do that. ;@}"
>
> Nice one, Al! :)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   _____
>
>
>
>
> .
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.734 / Virus Database: 488 - Release Date: 04/08/04