Developing/compiling software - Page 2

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

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Re: Developing/compiling software


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Their after sales service is as good or better than most. See comment
at end.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Just go on the Keil forum. As 80% of the professional world use Keil
that is a recommendation in itself. Besides I doubt if other customers
will talk to you.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Get the eval version of the compiler.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Correct yet still you ranted about it a few months back. You were going
to show us all the results of your SDCC -Keil comparison tests.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Wrong. Keil was bought by ARM. However that was just a change of
ownership. For the 8051 (and 166) nothing else changed. As they were
bought by ARM the changes were to the ARM tool chain.

Keil can still support all their 8051 compilers going back 20 years. As
those of you here will know, at christmas 2008 they even sorted out a
dongle problem for a version (rebadged as Franklin) that was 18 years
old...

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Developing/compiling software



Quoted text here. Click to load it

The OP needs to comment.  And being "as good or better than most"
doesn't necessarily say that one shouldn't see how it applies to their
specific circumstances.  In some cases, the norm is pretty bad.  It's
worth some investigation, unless it's already known at the outset that
it doesn't matter.  Which was my point.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The OP still needs to comment here.  But the Keil forum is an obvious
place to check out, I agree.  Band wagon propaganda isn't meaningful,
though.  Just because 80% of the professional world uses Microsoft
compilers for Windows development doesn't mean it's always the more
appropriate choice, either.  Nor should it be the case that
competition isn't supported.  Few markets are served as well by single
suppliers than if there are several viable ones.  Competition is good.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Now that's just you being sour and grumpy.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

That, too.


Yes, when I am ready.  Turns out, I have become more fully engaged in
work than I'd imagined and although I have plenty of raw data, it will
take some time (and thought) to pull it together for a post.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Which matters, as experience has done little but to inform me about.
It can be good or bad, but rarely indifferent.  Of course, I have no
idea about what the changes have and have not meant.  So I'll leave
this for you to rant about.  My point was to admit my ignorance.  If
you want to roll around in that mud, have at it.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

People matter.  Especially those near the top, whose attitudes and
goals impact everyone all the way down to those on the phone lines.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Oh, cripes.  A segue back into the dongle or not-to-dongle argument.
You and I will never agree on this point, either.  You are simply
wrong there, too.  Oh, well.

Someday, we should meet and have lunch.  If we still couldn't find
common ground or common worldviews, I'd at least be able to enjoy
watching you simmer over old grievances still remembered too well.

Jon

Re: Developing/compiling software


Quoted text here. Click to load it

No, I will talk to him but most developers are doing commercially
confidential stuff and time is money.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

:-) We did not expect you to produce any evidence.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

You made the point. I just clarified your FUD

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Stop digging a hole and talk about something you have some idea about.

Though we do know that SDCC has changed the whole development team more
than once... or is that why you were trying to sling mud at Keil?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

I know


Except I proved your entire argument WRONG with a live case in this very
NG not 8 months ago.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I know who to have a s a referee.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

No you I have a life.... Remember I do know other people who do know
you. I suggest you look in a mirror and mix with people a bit more.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Developing/compiling software



Quoted text here. Click to load it

Ironic, coming after suggesting you'd need a referree to meet.  Still,
I'm sure you meant this last part in a positive way so I'll just say
you shouldn't worry.  Just met with my Representative over lunch, a
few days ago, for example.  Plenty on my plate in that regard.  No pun
intended.

Jon

P.S.  I'd still think it would be helpful to others if you'd expand
even slightly on your earlier comment about SDCC.  I'm curious and I
did check to see what I could find about what few words you offered,
found something that seemed close, and if so it seems to be a bit out
of date.

Re: Developing/compiling software


Quoted text here. Click to load it

It was a recommendation from people who know you.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Developing/compiling software



Quoted text here. Click to load it

Obviously, not as well as you imagine.  In any case, this whole thrust
of yours is little other than an attempt at being personal.  Which is
exactly how you started with your responses here, again.  Rather than
dealing with a direct question, the answer to which may help others if
you'd cared to.

Oh, well.

Jon

Re: Developing/compiling software


In the country I'm living - PIC's are really hard-to-get ,and at a price. I
started looking at Ebay and found the cheapest option available which can
give me 32 I/O ports, and the best offers I could get was on the AT89S52,
and this is how I ended up with the ATMEL product

I definately agree with a few posts that PIC might be easier and maybe
cheaper, but like I said, I had to look at availability/price first, and now
I must move on to the next step, which is compiling the code I already
written over the past 2 months - without having any compiler or hardware. My
programmer arrived  on Friday and as soon as I made up my mind on a
compiler, then I can test(compile) the code which is currently only in a
.txt file, and hope there is no compilation errors.

My AT89S52's should arrive within the next 2 weeks, and only then will I see
if the past 3 months was a total waste of time.

Thank you for all the input
Much Appreciated
Lodewicus Maas


Re: Developing/compiling software


On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 20:19:13 +0200, "Lodewicus Maas"

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Best of luck.  The AT89 is a fine chip for some uses.  I'm not sure
why you haven't tried to compile the code, though.  As Chris has
mentioned, there are demo versions of commercial c compilers that are
available.  And besides that, there is SDCC which you could also do
some trial compilations with.  I'm not sure if the Keil IDE can do
this (it may work, just fine) but Silicon Labs has an IDE as well for
their 8051 core cpus and their IDE (and SiLab's web site discusses
this in an appnote) can integrate SDCC into it, so you should be able
to run some tests that way.  There are some slight differences in
syntax for ports, if I recall, but that's also documented.  At least
you could have tested for compilation before receiving parts.

I am gathering now this may be a hobby project, though you still
haven't said.  Best of luck, either way.

Jon

Re: Developing/compiling software


Quoted text here. Click to load it

There are demo version of the Keil and IAR.  Though I would suggest Keil
in this case as a first stop. It is the one area where they really
specialise.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Not worth the effort. Start with Keil

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Again not worth the effort. This is a lot of work for a system that will
not even come close to Keil

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The Atmel stuff will be set up to compile with the Keil extensions.  You
will have to port for the SDCC.

BTW there are some very cheap dev kits with the 4K version of the Keil.
However....

The code size limit is not the killer here. It is the DATA space. As
Keil does aggressive data overlaying in the DATA space you can get it to
compiler programs that the SDCC can't get to fit in the space.

I have seen cases where 119 bytes of DATA  was compiled into 23 bytes of
DATA space. So in that case the SDCC would run out of space and the 2K
eval Keil will compile and run the app.

That is without the optimisation of the code the Keil can do compared to
the SDCC.

Then there is the fact the Keil is VERY heavily tested compared to the
SDCC and WILL do what it says.

The you have the fact that most companies, like Atmel, write their code
to be Keil compliant (not SDCC compliant)

As Jon pointed out changing development teams can have an effect.
Whereas the Keil has had a single team all the way though SDCC has AFAIK
changed complete development teams several times.


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Developing/compiling software



Quoted text here. Click to load it

I think it took me a half hour to follow the instructions.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

True.  But it's been minor issues so far, in comparing them.  Some of
the differences are talked about in the SiLabs appnote.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The OP has yet to say what this is all about and money may yet be an
issue.  Hard to say.

SDCC is probably not the direction to head if you are expecting the
kind of sole-source support phone numbers and email you get when you
lay down some cash.  No doubt.

Jon

Re: Developing/compiling software


OK. So Keil is NOT an option anymore
.
The Demo/Eval version can only compile up to a max of 2K - which I reached
already. I then requested a quote from the local suppliers of Keil software,
and the quote is ...
.
.
I hope you're sitting ...
.
.
.
R 39,335.81 ( this is equal to 5,326.93 USD) - for a single user license
.
.
My whole outlook on life is "value for money", and I don't invest in
anything if this requirement is not met, but unfortunately there is no way
in which I can justify this as a hobbiest
.
I'm now busy looking at ImageCraft
.
The "doors" keep on closing, but eventually I'll get there.


Re: Developing/compiling software


Quoted text here. Click to load it

ImageCraft does not make an 8051 compiler - the make (amongst others) an
AVR compiler.

For hobby use, you have two options.  You can use SDCC for free, or you
can drop all thoughts about using the 8051.

The Atmel AVR devices are a much better choice for most uses - 8051 is
good when you have a history of using them, or when you are using
specialised chips with an 8051 core.

If you go for the AVR, you have several choices.  ImageCraft is a good,
cheap, user-friendly compiler.  WinAVR is a project based on avrgcc and
thus is entirely free.  There are a fair number of other compilers
available for the AVR, some low price and some high price - far more
/realistic/ options than for the 8051, especially for hobby or
low-budget use.

Re: Developing/compiling software


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Or use the 2K Keil or the 4K Keil if you can find one.  These can
compile programs the SDCC can't. However for hobby use the Keil is
expensive but then it is not aimed at hobby users.

for commercial use one of my customers worked out the SDCC cost them
about 5K in time and resources.  So free to buy does not always mean
completely free. Though for hobby use time is free.



--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Developing/compiling software


Quoted text here. Click to load it

For hobby or small usage, you can typically just buy a device with more
memory.  So what if it costs a dollar more - it is easier (and therefore
faster and therefore cheaper) that trying to make sure your code is
within such small size limits.  So what if SDCC takes 10 KB when Keil
can put the same program in 6 KB - if you have a 16 KB device, it
doesn't matter.  Code size is not always a big issue.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

People are always working out figures like that.  Occasionally, they
will actually come up with a figure that is realistic, but even then it
is not applicable to anyone else.

To get true figures like that, you'd need to actually do the work in
parallel with two different development teams, each of which being large
enough to make valid statistical comparisons about the abilities and
experiences of the two teams.  No one is going to do such a comparison -
at least, not for a 5K cost or saving.

So the numbers are based on guestimates and figures pulled out the air.
  You ask a developer to look briefly at the tools and he says it will
take me a week to get up to speed with Keil, and two weeks for SDCC -
the bean counter concludes that Keil will save a weeks worth of
development time.

I don't mean to say that these numbers are wrong for the customer in
question, just that for other potential users, the quote is barely worth
the pixels its written on.

Re: Developing/compiling software


Quoted text here. Click to load it

It should be half that.....


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Developing/compiling software


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Have you thought about using an AVR or MSP430 or something less
brain-dead (for which free/cheap tools are available)?

--
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow! This PIZZA symbolizes
                                  at               my COMPLETE EMOTIONAL
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Developing/compiling software


On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:00:17 +0200, "Lodewicus Maas"

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Last I checked (April, this year) Keil limits itself to 0x800 bytes
(2k) without registration and to 0x1000 bytes (4k) after that.  So you
_may_ be able to boost this to 4k if you register with them.  (I don't
know their policies about registration in your country, though.  So
you will just have to find out about it, I suppose.)

But if you feel that you will also exceed 4k, then... well, perhaps
Keil is now off the table for you.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

That's more than I would have expected.  I'm very sorry the situation
is like that, for you.  I mean that very sincerely.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I still don't know what code size you expect in your project.  And you
still have a few commercial vendors to check out (like IAR.)  I don't
believe IAR offers more than Keil for a trial version, though I really
don't know about it.  But if it your project is likely to be larger
than 4k, it's possible that the price of the few serious commercial
alternatives may very well leave you with SDCC as the only viable
choice.  However, take a look at Dunfield:

http://www.dunfield.com/products/dks.htm

They are a commercial vendor for low cost c compilers.  They
apparently offer one for the 8031/2 core.  So that may be another
option for you to consider that is already known to be 'cheap.'  You
may look up some reviews that compare it with SDCC before deciding.

Keep finding out about other commercial options, of course, and ask
just as you have with Keil.  But if your project will become much
larger and you feel unable to afford the kinds of prices you find with
those commercial vendors, it's probably better to just invest your
time in SDCC before getting in too deep with the trial versions of
compilers you can ill afford.

So far, SDCC has just worked exactly as intended without difficulty
for the modest tasks I've thrown its way.  So I have no complaints,
yet.

Keil accepts 16-bit descriptions for SFRs that happen to actually be
16 bits wide.  To do the same with SDCC, I have to write two
statements in c, one for each byte.  The generated code in each is
different, but equally fast and occupying the same space.  Just by way
of example how your source code might differ a little.

Although I haven't heard specific details about IAR's pricing for the
8051, I have heard some numbers for IAR's offering for other
microcontrollers where Imagecraft, for example, also plays in the
commercial marketplace.  And there, IAR is not a low-cost compiler
tool, either.  Not by any stretch.  So although you may see a
difference by a factor of 2 (less?), or so, I wouldn't expect a whole
lot better than that.  It's still worth a moment for you to find out
an exact number from IAR and see where it falls relative to your own
willingness to spend for this.  Give them a shot.

Luckily, SDCC seems not a bad choice so far as I'm aware right now.
Don't be scared about SDCC just because Chris H works so energetically
to make it seem terrible.  He has always been quick to reply with
scare tactics regarding anything that he sees as 'threatening' to high
priced commercial products.  Last April, he and I talked a bit about
all this and he is very good at making highly veiled, while almost
seemingly definite claims about SDCC.  In the end, though, he refuses
to be literal and specific and I've taken the view that all of his
knowledge about SDCC is a decade old or more, if it has any value to
it at all.

For example, here is a snippet of our conversation:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

In this thread, he once again made a semi-specific comment which seems
on its face to be accurate.  I took the time to look up what few words
he used that I might use in a search and found that there was indeed
something about it... but it is old news, back in 2000/2001, and
apparently long since gone as an issue.  And here in this thread, he
continues to avoid providing a recent reference or source or to
elaborate at all.  Which seems very true to form.

There may be good reasons.  Free and low cost c compilers that can do
a credible job threaten to topple high prices.  And with lower prices,
there is less money within those commercial business entities to fund
internal research/development of improved techniques.  So he may have
a holy grail he's pursuing.  I just can't say.  It's just that he
remains a reliable apologist for expensive commercial compilers and
dongles and a consistent attacker of anything that even 'looks'
somewhat different from the usual commercial business model operation.

My main point here isn't to attack Chris H, but to point out that you
shouldn't be frightened by him regarding alternatives like SDCC.  You
are definitely able to do serious projects with SDCC.  If you have any
question, google a few projects that have used it in the past with
good success.  For example, here is one I quickly found, just now:

http://www.arrickrobotics.com/robomenu/adam.html

You can get the SDCC manual here:

http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/doc/sdccman.pdf

Also, the author of the SDCC 8051 component was John Hartman and he
has a mildly interesting 8051 web site here:

http://www.noicedebugger.com/help/8051.htm

Besides some minor differences in the way the SDCC c compiler handles
some things in the source code from the way that Keil does, there are
substantial differences in the way the compilers may be invoked
through their option switches.  See this appnote for some thoughts:

https://www.silabs.com/Support%20Documents/TechnicalDocs/an198.pdf

On a final note, you may still want to revisit the idea of using an
8031/2 core, at all.  Though I seem to recall that you've already
written a lot of code on the basis of having selected this part which
has better availability for you, and perhaps you've grown quite
familiar with its details by now, so perhaps that's not really much of
an option.

Best of luck.

Jon

Re: Developing/compiling software


Quoted text here. Click to load it

This HAS changed recently, with Cypress Claiming this:
[" Cypress also offers fully functional, free compilers with no code
size limitations for both the PSoC 3 and PSoC 5 device families."]

["Cypress already has agreements in place to offer free compilers for
both the PSoC 3 and 5 families. The Keil CA51 Compiler for PSoC 3 and
the GNU GCC-ARM compiler are bundled with Creator, which also includes
a debugger to support on-chip debug and trace functionality"]

My understanding is they now have a Full Keil, with reduced optimize
choices,
(and somehow Cypress Centric?)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

This high price seems to follow the Embarcadero (ex Borland) selling
model.
ie Target the deep pocket corporates, but have some fringe tools, that
are
somewhat usable.

PC comments : PC tool flows ARE quite useful for embedded work, for
algorithm development

Here, Embarcadero has Turbo Delphi, which is free, but is also
crippled enough
to not compile many web projects.
Meanwhile, MicroSoft has  quite usable versions of their C and Basic
flows,
(which DO compile most web projects...) and there are a number of
other free PC tool flows.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

HiTech also had a legacy version of their compiler free, IIRC ?
Not sure of the current availability, perhaps on a mirror somewhere ?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

My advice to a novice, would to be to worry less about the compiler -
(as Silicon IS getting cheaper and larger all the time), but to focus
more on the Debug tool chain.

Unless you are intending to produce 10,000+ units into a price-
paranoid
market, then simply choosing the next-larger variant, is a better
solution.

You are always better to start with a more capable device and shrink
to the final application, than the other way around.

Atmel have an OSD in release, and the Silabs offering is mature and
usable,
and Silabs have very good ToolStick level development choices.

The Cypress Debug flows look to extend things, as they claim a
TraceBuffer
I have not seen volume PSoC3 prices, but their web prices are
comfortably under $10

-jg


Re: Developing/compiling software



Quoted text here. Click to load it

Which package is that? PK51 costs more, but if don't need their RTOS
and debugger, then check CA51.

Site Timeline