Extended Hamming encode/decode
in [Embedded]
|
Prev: Announcement: New version of UML state machine code generator available
Next: CFP with Extended Deadline of Mar. 21, 2010: The 2010 International Conference on Computer Design (CDES'10), USA, July 2010
From: Jon Kirwan on 8 Mar 2010 05:25 On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 10:05:37 +0100, David Brown <david(a)westcontrol.removethisbit.com> wrote: ><snip> >> So following this idea, >> Jon can add a licence notice that : >> " this code is released under LGPL, with the exception >> that you can #include these source files in whatever >> code you develop" >> It should be ok, i've seen it done already for other cases. >> I'm using Affero GPL for a project, which is just GPL >> with an additional section about networked code. >> > >That's the essence of the eCos and FreeRTOS licenses, and would (I >think) be a very reasonable choice of license for the code. > >It looks like Jon's intentions are a bit looser than that - he does not >want to require people to make their changes available to others, or to >require that the pass on the source code to other users. That suggests >a simple BSD license is what he wants. However, yg's approach is kind of interesting in its own right. It certainly lets folks use the source code by writing their own short module files and including what I wrote into them. Has its uses. Here's a more flexible example than I posted up before: http://www.infinitefactors.org/misc/hamming.zip There is only hamming.c, hamming.h, and a test program now. Very simple. Jon
From: whygee on 8 Mar 2010 05:42 hi ! Jon Kirwan wrote: > Here's a more flexible example than I posted up before: > http://www.infinitefactors.org/misc/hamming.zip > > There is only hamming.c, hamming.h, and a test program now. > Very simple. seems so, nice code, but please, if you can, put the files in a subdirectory so there is no need to sort them after they are uncompressed in a crowded directory :-) also, may I suggest that the "auto" keywords can also be #define'd out ? About the size of the C data types on various C platforms, I developed these files a few years ago and tested on many machines (servers, desktop, embedded, even a Cray ;-D) http://ygdes.com/sources/lm98/machine/machine.c http://ygdes.com/sources/lm98/machine/machine.h.template http://ygdes.com/sources/lm98/machine/machine.sh Some more useful routines : http://ygdes.com/sources/lm98/def32.h http://ygdes.com/sources/lm98/def64.h OK, I know, the comments are in french, I wrote them for a french magazine but they are easy to understand. HTH > Jon yg -- http://ygdes.com / http://yasep.org
From: Boudewijn Dijkstra on 8 Mar 2010 09:16 Op Mon, 08 Mar 2010 03:03:55 +0100 schreef David Brown <david.brown(a)hesbynett.removethisbit.no>: > Jon Kirwan wrote: >> On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 01:45:14 +0100, David Brown >> <david.brown(a)hesbynett.removethisbit.no> wrote: >>> Jon Kirwan wrote: >>>> On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 20:23:26 +0100, David Brown >>>> <david.brown(a)hesbynett.removethisbit.no> wrote: >>>>> steve_schefter(a)hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>> [...] >> Hmm. >> I had read this: >> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html >> It seems to actually recommend that I release it under the >> GPL, not LGPL and says near the top, "using the Lesser GPL >> permits use of the library in proprietary programs" which is >> about what I want. >> > > Please, don't read anything written by RMS unless you like deep > philosophy. Great things have come from RMS and his dedication to free > software, including the GPL, the gnu project, Linux as it is today, and > endless pieces of software. But he is more than a touch fanatical, and > takes an unmovable position that keeping any software closed or > restricted in any way is morally wrong. Restricted in the sense that you cannot do what you want with it? No, the BSD license is much more free in this sense. Related was the hypocrisy of RMS towards OpenBSD, which became the theme of the OpenBSD 4.3 release. http://openbsd.org/lyrics.html#43 -- Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma: http://www.opera.com/mail/ (remove the obvious prefix to reply by mail)
From: D Yuniskis on 8 Mar 2010 12:14 Jon Kirwan wrote: > On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 01:00:40 -0700, D Yuniskis > <not.going.to.be(a)seen.com> wrote: > >> <snip> >> Nowadays, with FLASH based systems, it becomes increasingly >> more common to swap in bits of your application "as needed". >> (i.e. serial FLASH). With dynamic linking (late binding) >> this is a piece of cake! Load the code into RAM, make >> all the bindings (unresolved externals) to the "resident >> code", then "run". When done, throw it away and load whatever >> the next part of the application needs to be. > > This would be impractical on most of the products I work on. > Doable on a few, I suppose. Tempting on one or two. But > it's mostly not possible. Of course. It's not applicable in all cases. My point was to illustrate how deferred binding can now have a real role in the embedded marketplace as more and more devices use serial flash with limited RAM, etc. (e.g., a Gb of serial flash is now affordable in small devices)
From: D Yuniskis on 8 Mar 2010 12:20
John Devereux wrote: > Jon Kirwan <jonk(a)infinitefactors.org> writes: > > [...] > >> Partly, it was exactly because of your reaction. We've >> recently had a modest discussion about licensing and I have >> frankly found my reading of specific licenses to have muddled >> by understanding more than clarified it. So much to take in >> and it still hasn't gelled in my mind, yet. >> >> Partly, I think, because I'm not yet even sure what I want. >> >> I'm very much open to ANY thoughts here. >> > > How about "Written by Jon Kirwan 2010. This file is hereby released into > the public domain" ? You might want to be careful about using that phrase! Not only does it's meaning vary from country to country, but it essentially says, "You can behave as if this was *your* original work without giving *me* any credit/mention". IANAL but advise folks to think carefully before adopting *any* legalese in their works. Once done, it is impossible to undo. (ignorance is not a recognized defense) > Otherwise, perhaps the "BSD style" license as used by other > embedded-controller oriented free projects. Based on the one I just > found in in avr-libc: > > Copyright (c) 2010 Jon Kirwan > > All rights reserved. > > Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without > modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: > > * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright > notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. > > * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright > notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in > the documentation and/or other materials provided with the > distribution. > > * Neither the name of the copyright holders nor the names of > contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived > from this software without specific prior written permission. > > THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" > AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE > IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE > ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE > LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR > CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF > SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS > INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN > CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) > ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE > POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. > > > [...] > |