Prev: Bluetooth...where to start?
Next: Press Release - Reliable Software Technologies, Ada-Europe 2010
From: achadya on 5 Jun 2010 21:45
>Hello.
>We are in the beginning of development of new product with ARM7
>Can someone tell us what options we have for development tools? We
>need a list of available dev toolset, such as
>compiler+emulator+(RTOS)+(dev. board)+(processor) that work with each
>other. also, perhaps some comments on those tools.
>
>Thanks!!
>
>Jack
>Hi :)
I recently purchased an Embedded Artists LPC2478 board and the Code_Red
ECLIPSE and GNU based integrated toolset I am still awaiting the hardware
to arrive but have registered the software license and am quite happy with
what I see so far.
This alternative to KEIL which is astronomically priced only cost me around
$1400 for the LPC2478 board the JTAG probe and the IDE. It is supposedly
possible to compile a free version of some of this but I am highly
experienced and could not get one working. I suggest buying an already
integrated tool kit.

---------------------------------------
Posted through http://www.EmbeddedRelated.com
From: Chris H on 6 Jun 2010 05:41
In message <V-ydnVQ4wpE0YJfRnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, achadya
<jfloder(a)n_o_s_p_a_m.hotmail.com> writes
>>Hello.
>>We are in the beginning of development of new product with ARM7
>>Can someone tell us what options we have for development tools? We
>>need a list of available dev toolset, such as
>>compiler+emulator+(RTOS)+(dev. board)+(processor) that work with each
>>other. also, perhaps some comments on those tools.
>>
>>Thanks!!
>>
>>Jack
>>Hi :)
>I recently purchased an Embedded Artists LPC2478 board and the Code_Red
>ECLIPSE and GNU based integrated toolset I am still awaiting the hardware
>to arrive but have registered the software license and am quite happy with
>what I see so far.
>This alternative to KEIL which is astronomically priced

No the Keil is quite reasonably priced for what you get. It used to be
that Accountants knew the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
Now it is more true of programmers.


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



From: David Brown on 6 Jun 2010 08:04
Chris H wrote:
> In message <V-ydnVQ4wpE0YJfRnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, achadya
> <jfloder(a)n_o_s_p_a_m.hotmail.com> writes
>>> Hello.
>>> We are in the beginning of development of new product with ARM7
>>> Can someone tell us what options we have for development tools? We
>>> need a list of available dev toolset, such as
>>> compiler+emulator+(RTOS)+(dev. board)+(processor) that work with each
>>> other. also, perhaps some comments on those tools.
>>>
>>> Thanks!!
>>>
>>> Jack
>>> Hi :)
>> I recently purchased an Embedded Artists LPC2478 board and the Code_Red
>> ECLIPSE and GNU based integrated toolset I am still awaiting the hardware
>> to arrive but have registered the software license and am quite happy with
>> what I see so far.
>> This alternative to KEIL which is astronomically priced
>
> No the Keil is quite reasonably priced for what you get. It used to be
> that Accountants knew the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
> Now it is more true of programmers.
>

As happens so often here, you've misunderstood what the poster /
customer wants, as well as basic economics.

It could well be that Keil is reasonably priced for what you get. But
the customer does not want that. He is happy with what he has got from
Code Red - how could Keil possibly be a better choice or better value
/for him/ when it costs much more?

If I want to make a board with a few blinking lights and a few keys,
I'll pick an AVR. I don't care if there's a Cortex M3 device that
offers far more MIPs per mW, or more KB per $. If the cheaper device
does the job, then that's the best value for money.

You regularly like to point out that the big commercial toolchains like
Keil and IAR are much "better" than cheaper tools (and especially
anything gcc related). It may be that they are. You also like to tell
people that they will save you money through saved time, or by letting
you use smaller or slower target chips. It may be that this is
sometimes the case. But the fact remains that these tools are very
expensive, and represent a significant cash investment with a pay-off
only over the longer term. The "best tool for the job" is not
necessarily the same thing as "the best tool".


From: Michael Kellett on 6 Jun 2010 10:53

"David Brown" <david.brown(a)hesbynett.removethisbit.no> wrote in message
news:L9WdnYosxYpXE5bRnZ2dnUVZ8kednZ2d(a)lyse.net...
> Chris H wrote:
>> In message <V-ydnVQ4wpE0YJfRnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, achadya
>> <jfloder(a)n_o_s_p_a_m.hotmail.com> writes
>>>> Hello.
>>>> We are in the beginning of development of new product with ARM7
>>>> Can someone tell us what options we have for development tools? We
>>>> need a list of available dev toolset, such as
>>>> compiler+emulator+(RTOS)+(dev. board)+(processor) that work with each
>>>> other. also, perhaps some comments on those tools.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!!
>>>>
>>>> Jack
>>>> Hi :)
>>> I recently purchased an Embedded Artists LPC2478 board and the Code_Red
>>> ECLIPSE and GNU based integrated toolset I am still awaiting the
>>> hardware
>>> to arrive but have registered the software license and am quite happy
>>> with
>>> what I see so far.
>>> This alternative to KEIL which is astronomically priced
>>
>> No the Keil is quite reasonably priced for what you get. It used to be
>> that Accountants knew the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
>> Now it is more true of programmers.
>>
>
> As happens so often here, you've misunderstood what the poster / customer
> wants, as well as basic economics.
>
> It could well be that Keil is reasonably priced for what you get. But the
> customer does not want that. He is happy with what he has got from Code
> Red - how could Keil possibly be a better choice or better value /for him/
> when it costs much more?
>
> If I want to make a board with a few blinking lights and a few keys, I'll
> pick an AVR. I don't care if there's a Cortex M3 device that offers far
> more MIPs per mW, or more KB per $. If the cheaper device does the job,
> then that's the best value for money.
>
> You regularly like to point out that the big commercial toolchains like
> Keil and IAR are much "better" than cheaper tools (and especially anything
> gcc related). It may be that they are. You also like to tell people that
> they will save you money through saved time, or by letting you use smaller
> or slower target chips. It may be that this is sometimes the case. But
> the fact remains that these tools are very expensive, and represent a
> significant cash investment with a pay-off only over the longer term. The
> "best tool for the job" is not necessarily the same thing as "the best
> tool".
>
>

Unfortunately the OP did not tell us what he wanted to do. I have just
launched a customer on to a Keil development route for �17.83 (ST-Link kit)
which comes with USB debugger/programmer hardware, Keil 32k limited tools
version, IAR linited version and Atollic Lite tools. For my customer the 32k
Keil tool set is fine and the cost seems pretty down to earth to me !
I haven't compared Atollic with Code Red but I think it's a GNU package with
no code size or use time limit.

(BTW the ST-LInk package looks to me to be by far the best value "get
started with ARM" offer at the moment - I don't know if the hardware is
useable with non ST chips.)

So although he didn't quote evidence Chris is quite right - Keil is good
value for what you get - free for up to 32k, about �1800 for 256k and about
�3000 for unlimted.

If the OP wants an RTOS and a dev board Keil do those too.

I have no relationship with Keil other than as a (happy) customer.

Now for the bee in my bonnet !!!
Why do people buy development boards ? They either have no hardware
(like the Silabs ones) so you need to make a board with your own stuff on to
get your project going or they have loads of stuff on them (like the ST
ones) but it's never what you want, so you need to make a board with your
own stuff on to get your project going. Why not make a board with the
processor and your own stuff on to get your project going - that way you
get real hardware a damn sight sooner.

Happy (rainy) Sunday afternoon.

Michael Kellett



From: D Yuniskis on 6 Jun 2010 11:18
Hi Michael,

Michael Kellett wrote:
> Why do people buy development boards ? They either have no hardware
> (like the Silabs ones) so you need to make a board with your own stuff on to
> get your project going or they have loads of stuff on them (like the ST
> ones) but it's never what you want, so you need to make a board with your
> own stuff on to get your project going.

Yes! I simply cannot understand this huge waste of effort.
You are *going* to design a board *anyway*. Do it and at least
get started on the path to nailing down all the "gotchas" that
*will* come up in the design.

Years ago, I could *almost* understand the rationale that "it
lets the programmers get started" (yet another self-delusion!).
But, nowadays, you can write and debug *lots* of code without
ever needing real hardware. For most projects, you don't even
need to use the actual tools for the targeted platform for
much (most?) of the code!

Spend the time thinking about what the product actually has to
do, formally describe/document that -- then start designing
the software WHILE THE HARDWARE IS BEING DESIGNED/FABBED.

It is *so* much more productive to have an "X0" version of
the real prototype hardware WHEN YOU ACTUALLY NEED IT than
to be farting around with something that does nothing more
(in practical terms) than give you CPU, RAM and ROM (and
some lame I/O).

[and don't tell me you've got such bizzare I/O that you
*have* to have a board to write any code! If that's the
case, then, chances are, the "development board" doesn't
have what you need; or, has something that you can *kludge*
to work -- but you'll have to unkludge and fix once the
*real* hardware comes along; or, you have an "insecurity"
about stubbing code and backfilling later (in which case,
you probably don't kknow what you want that code to *do*!)]

> Why not make a board with the
> processor and your own stuff on to get your project going - that way you
> get real hardware a damn sight sooner.

I think the problem lies in the fact that most projects don't
know what their end goal is until some time in the *middle*
of the development effort (*if* that soon!). And, they
follow the "OhMiGosh! We'd better start writing code
RIGHT AWAY or we'll never get done on time..." technique.

Having *a* board gives them a false sense of accomplishment
("Look! My bubble sort is running on this board! See? Each
time that red LED blinks, it's sorted the entire list!!")

I have six designs in the mill at the present time. I'll
have 95% (literally) of the code for them written and
debugged before I'll need hardware for the last little
bits. IME, developing with an early "need" for hardware
usually means you haven't thought about how you are
going to *formally* test/prove your design (unless you've
invested a lot of resources into an equally smart test
fixture and test protocol -- that can exercise all aspects
of your code solely "from it's field interface") :-/

[I hope you aren't designing the next generation ABS!]

> Happy (rainy) Sunday afternoon.

Maybe where *you* are -- 108F here today :-/
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Bluetooth...where to start?
Next: Press Release - Reliable Software Technologies, Ada-Europe 2010