Need guidance,where to start C programming

You state a preference for "embedded" programming, but to what end? Are you planning on training yourself up for a job in this area? Or just playing around in your spare time?

By "MSDOS" I'm using you mean wintel!?! Free tools are a little easier to come by for the PC platform. GCC (and packages such as MinGW/MSYS) provide unrestricted development tools on Win32 with abundant 3rd-party library support for pretty much anything you might want to do (and GCC for Linux is a given).

If you _actually_ mean MSDOS, then look at DJGPP (if it still exists).

You have less options on embedded platforms - and of course you need the hardware to actually do anything! SDCC comes to mind there.

Regards,

--
Mark McDougall, Engineer
Virtual Logic Pty Ltd, 
21-25 King St, Rockdale, 2216
Ph: +612-9599-3255 Fax: +612-9599-3266

ok.

Saying you are more comfortable with Keil than with MSDOS is comparing a compiler to what amounts to a file system (that includes a few other features.) Two different things, unless Keil is doing stuff I'm unaware of.

This comment confirms to me that you are thinking about comparing a compiler with a file system. Odd.

(I seem to recall that if you register an eval compiler from Keil, the limited programming space increases a little bit, but I might be wrong on that point.)

There are thousands... maybe even a million tools available online for free. Given that you conflate MSDOS and Keil, I'm not sure what to suggest.

If you used Keil for the 8031 core type processors, then you might look at SDCC. (Both Keil and SDCC target others, as well.) It's free and isn't limited, so far as I'm aware. If you pick up a development kit from SiLabs, they even have a small application note on integrating SDCC into their IDE and debugger. (AN198)

I actually bought MSDOS in boxed, shrink-wrapped form -- manuals and disks -- for $5 each. There was a time when it wasn't at all expensive. Not sure about the situation, today. However, MSDOS won't compile code for you -- not by itself, anyway. You seem perhaps a little confused on this point (or else you confused me by your writing.) There is this, though:

Jon

It is unclear as to whether you seek to be an embedded programmer because of your mention of MS-DOS.

Nowadays, you can download for free the "Express" editions of C#, C++ and VB from Microsoft, which will give you a good grounding in the principles of .NET, if nothing else.

This is an admirable move by Microsoft; ISTR having to pay £100 for the starter edition of VB4, which came on floppies and then crippled the floppies to prevent more than one installation, an approach that killed my backup.

Whether you are embedded or PC, the principles of programming remain the same, (It is only the exection context which changes), so experience gained in the PC world can only be of value to you.

Also, if you have Microsoft Office, the macro language for Excel, etc, is VBA; a virtually complete version of VB before the advent of .NET.

Load Excel, type F11 and you're in the VBA environment, which is similar to any of the embedded design environemnts with which I have dealt.

Of course DJGPP still exists - it's open source, so as long as someone is willing to host it on a web site, or pass on the archives, it still exists. In this case you'll find it on DJ's website at .

However, DJGPP is of limited use for DOS programming since it is 32-bit only - it therefore only works for 32-bit extended DOS programs. For

16-bit DOS, you want something like Turbo C or Watcom - look at for information (and for a modern DOS-compatible OS).

With embedded platforms you have vastly *more* options, and gcc comes to mind far faster than SDCC (unless you live in an 8051 world).

Amazingly enough, DJGPP is still popular. It's still in the same place

and still has a mailing list (djgpp@).

If you use the GNU tools, most embedded targets come with a simulator. For example, I mostly use the Renesas R8C microcontrollers. I use gcc to program them, and there's a simulator (part of gdb) that I test most things on before going to hardware.

includes information about what targets are supported and which have simulators, for example.

Also, the Watcom C, once state of the art on DOS, has been released in an open source version. I used this way back in the day, and it generated pretty good code, but when Watcom was purchased by Sybase (for SQL Anywhere), I guess the compiler was not a core business, and the C compiler went open ... :

I unceremoniously ripped the following from their web site ...

Latest Release (February 2009) The Open Watcom contributors have released version 1.8. Installers for Windows, OS/2, DOS, and Linux, as well as the release source archive is available for download. Ready to print documentation in PDF format is also available. For accessing the development source code see the source section below. Review the list of release changes for information about what is new in the latest release.

I can't comment further, I haven't used it in years, but it can generate .com files, .exe files and .dlls (or it could) and I used it to compile a C based forth which ran on a bunch of platforms ...

HTH, Rob Sciuk

I meant - less _free_ options... especially when looking at full (non-crippled) functionality.

Yeah, admittedly most of my embedded work has been at the 8051 end of the scale.

Regards,

--
Mark McDougall, Engineer
Virtual Logic Pty Ltd, 
21-25 King St, Rockdale, 2216
Ph: +612-9599-3255 Fax: +612-9599-3266

I also believe that the first versions of Microsoft's C compiler (not sure if we're talking "Visual" or earlier) was actually Watcom?!?

Regards,

--
Mark McDougall, Engineer
Virtual Logic Pty Ltd, 
21-25 King St, Rockdale, 2216
Ph: +612-9599-3255 Fax: +612-9599-3266

Apart from the hardware, which you obviously have to pay for, there are plenty of free options for embedded development. There are three main routes to free development. First, there are many suppliers that provide limited function free tools that are perfectly usable (if the code limit is greater than your device's code space, it is effectively unlimited). Secondly, there are a very large number of targets (dozens of architectures) with gcc support, which are entirely free (unless you want to pay for support, extra libraries, etc.). Thirdly, there are a huge number of smaller free tools available for a wide range of targets and programming languages (such as basic, pascal, ada, forth, etc.)

If you think embedded means "8051 programmed in C" then your options for unlimited free tools are somewhat limited.

... snip ...

It does, and it runs fine on various Windozi. It is NOT a gui environment. I prefer it for most things.

--
 [mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net) 
 [page]: 
            Try the download section.

My recollection is that MS-DOS Microsoft C started out as a rebadged version of Lattice C.

-- Chris Burrows CFB Software Armaide: ARM Oberon-07 Development System for Windows

I agree. This follows the general MS rule - never make anything original.

--
 [mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net) 
 [page]: 
            Try the download section.

Microsoft Bob was an original idea...

Which went over kinda like a lead balloon, didn't it?

--
ArarghMail903 at [drop the 'http://www.' from ->] http://www.arargh.com
BCET Basic Compiler Page: http://www.arargh.com/basic/index.html

To reply by email, remove the extra stuff from the reply address.

They were not. Watcom was written later than the early Microsoft C.

Regards,

-- Walter Banks Byte Craft Limited

Yes, but it's just about the only example I can think of of true Microsoft "innovation" - mostly they copy existing ideas, steal ideas from their partners, or buy up other companies with ideas.

I've always maintained that there are two kinds of ideas at Microsoft: bad ones and other people's.

--
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow! I am covered with
                                  at               pure vegetable oil and I am
                               visi.com            writing a best seller!

And pretty dreadful it is too. Call me a luddite, but I uninstalled the current Express edition of C++ approximately 10 days after I installed it. I only wanted an update on Visual C 5 - which I actually bought, and was ok. Kinda. The Express editions (and probably the full-blown versions) are just plain broken. Microsoft is getting worse. (Have you tried IE8? If not, don't bother. It no longer understands anchors...)

If you're developing for a Wintel platform, DJGPP is still fine. If you need more Windowsiness, then Borland Builder is still fine. If you need less, then GCC. If you're developing for an embedded platform, then GCC. If it's pain you're into, then by all means suck on the Microsoft Express editions.

Rant over. Feel much better now ;).

Steve

--

Hear hear. When I tried doing some development in C++.NET a few years back, the grounding was akin to one while holding a 1KV line. It hurt like hell, and the best case scenario was that the entire system came crashing down.

--
Rob Gaddi, Highland Technology
Email address is currently out of order