[Almost ANN] Anything wrong with Unimal?

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Hello NG,
Some time ago I posted an external macro processor, Unimal, and I
thought it would get the attention from embedded folks concerned with
moving as much work as possible to compile time (saving on
initialization time and code/data/stack footprint).
But... so far the acceptance has been frustratingly limited.
Could somebody concerned with the problems mentioned take a look and
tell me what I could do better to improve the acceptance of the tool?

Thank you very much,
- Ark


Re: [Almost ANN] Anything wrong with Unimal?
Quoted text here. Click to load it

It seems that in essence Unimal is a scripting language that allows for
automatic code generation (and generation of lookup tables, etc) at build
time. The conventional way to accomplish something like this would be to use
a standard tool like perl or awk or something similar. For larger problems
use C itself, e.g. yacc is a C program which takes configuration data and
generates C code.

This is what I have done in the past. For automatically generating things
like lookup tables I have used standard tools like shell script and awk. For
more complicated tasks like automatically generating code for a state
machine from a text file describing the states I have used C.

I'm sure your tool is sophisticated and offers more benefits than the
scripts I would write. Your "convincing example" is pretty cool. But the
advantage you offered would have to be huge to get me to switch from a
simple approach with well known, mature, ubiquitous, free tools that I am
familiar with (and so are my colleagues and those who will come after me),
to an unfamiliar, proprietary tool from a company I have never heard of.

Selection of tools for the build chain is a decision that lasts for years
and hence is considered carefully, and with much caution. I think you will
have a hard time getting tools accepted here. I think you will likely have
more luck with "point" tools, i.e. tools like a validater, a lint, a
profiler, etc., which are used by individual developers outside the build
chain, and which are easily omitted or replaced with something different if
they turn out to be a poor choice, or if the company that make them goes

Site Timeline