AVR-Chat

> From: wbounce
> 
> It has taken me a while but I finally have a stable version of winavr.
> From the little I have seen there are differences in compilers. I have
> run across some CodeVision examples and the syntax is difference enough
> to cause problems. Not enough that I could not follow what was going on
> but enough to cause compile problems things like _bv verse bv etc
> 
> The main reason I use is is it is free. But now I can also say because
> there are good people who are willing to help and also example code.

In any case I'll keep WinAVR around.  I really like the Programmer's Notepad.
Someone mentioned the Eclipse IDE (www.eclipse.org).  Does anyone have
experience using it with CodeVision, ImageCraft and/or WinAVR?


> --------------------------
> From: arhodes19044
> 
> Great questions!  GCC is nice and free, but does it come at a cost?
> Are there worthwhile "value-added" features for the more costly
> compilers?

I don't recall anyone commenting on this ... can anyone say what
CodeVision/ImageCraft have that WinAVR doesn't?

> The command line interface is slightly annoying but not impossible,
> even when I still have not completely solved my problem with runing
> the make program.  I worked around it and I am compiling just fine.  I
> soon will have the actual hardware. to try out.  Mavric-IIb and ICE-
> cube.

Have you tried Programmer's Notepad?  I haven't had to use WinAVR's command line
interface, I just click on the menu item "Make All".

> I can manage with GCC since my needs are not complex.  But I still
> would like to know if the other $$$ compliers have features worth the
> cost.   I will be watching the anwsers to your question!

Me too :-)


> --------------------------
> From: DLC <dlc@frii.com>
> 
> Tony,
> 
> ....
>   I've found gcc-avr to be complete, with some good tools (like one to
> put the assembly and source interleaved in a .lst file, verbose, but
> OK to use ....

I have found gcc (WinAVR in my case) to be a pleasant experience so far but I
haven't built extensive projects in it yet.  I downloaded the trial version of
ImageCraft because that's what the vendor had done the example code in that I
was struggling to get to work.  I don't have enough experience in either of them
yet to differentiate the two (I haven't tried different pointer constructs,
enums, etc. yet).

>   I've not found avr-gcc to be universally well optimized though
> compared to Bascom/AVR or CodeVision/AVR.  I was astonished to see
> what was generated for what should have been a simple ISR routine,
> so there is some "cost" for the free nature of gcc-avr there.  The
> printf library is also very "fat" compared to those other dedicated
> IDE/compiler combos.

At the moment I value robustness/reliability more than code compactness.  I want
to know that an error is mine, not the compiler, and I'm using fairly large
processors at the moment.

>   Since avr-gcc is just another port of gcc to another hardware
> platform, there is no real hardware support for the peripherals in
> the AVR chips.  I've heard of others that have abstracted the hardware
> out in "third party" libs, but I haven't seen them, so I can't comment.
> For many of us, this isn't much of a handicap since we like to
> twiddle bits to set things up ourselves anyway, but having library
> support for other I2C, SPI, etc. chips is quite handy.  Perhaps a
> Google for such code will provide the needed help, not tried that yet.

At this point in my "embedded" life it's good for me to write all that stuff
myself so that I get familiar with the internal workings of the AVRs.  Of
course, it'd be handy if I have to get it done today!  :-)

Is CodeVision or ImageCraft better in this area?

> -------------------------- From the Message Archives ----
> From: "Cobb, Quentin" <quentin_cobb@...> 
> Date: Mon Mar 15, 2004  4:59 pm
>
> GCC - Is for Linux, free software aficionados. It works, isn't pretty,
> takes a bit of work to get all the bits up and running, has the stuff the
> commercial products have, but not in a ready-to-go hold-your-hand package.

I've found it easy to get along with so far ...

> Imagecraft. "Industrial Strength" professional, expensive compiler. I
> can't talk much about it as it's beyond my budget so I haven't used it or
> seen it used.

I was curious why you say ImageCraft is "expensive", so I went back and looked.
I had only been looking at the STD version ($199 USD).  I hadn't realized that
it was only good for up to 64Kb.  To support the ATMega128, etc. you have to go
up to the "Advanced" version which is $348 USD - a little steep for what I'm
doing.  I thought that CodeVision was $150 USD but I had again misread the web
site.  It's 150 EUR! ($196 USD).  I also found that it's available from
http://www.prllc.com for $180 USD.  Hmmm, I think I may try to see if I can live
with WinAVR.  You sure can't beat the price.

> My personal preference is CodeVision. There is a free "evaluation" version
> that is code-size limited, but good enough for all but the really big
> projects. Even if you decide to pay for it, it's still very reasonable.
> Much easier to set up than GCC, has nice code generating wizards that save a
> bit of manual reading the first time you use a feature. Lots of code
> libraries.
>
> ALL these C compilers meet your criteria, (except Imagecraft isn't very
> cheap)

Ease of use and "lots of code libraries" are important to me but I wonder if it
would be worth the $180 in my work - yea, I know, no one can answer that one
except me ...

I have the book "Embedded C Programming and the Atmel AVR" which is based on
CodeVision so that's one plus for it :-)

In my limited use of WinAVR and ImageCraft I think WinAVR puts out better
diagnostics (warnings, errors, etc.).  I had at least one case where the code I
was trying to convert had "if (x = 0)".  ImageCraft silently ignored it but
WinAVR warned that "=" probably should be "==".

Bottom line, from reading current emails, archive emails, and web sites is that
I'm coming to the conclusion that, if you want a compiler with an IDE,
CodeVision and ImageCraft are fairly close but that CodeVision is less expensive
and if you can live without a fancy IDE that WinAVR (gcc) is free and will do
just about anything the others will do except for code generation wizards.

Have I missed something?

Thanks to all for your comments ...

Cheers,

Chuck Hackett
"Good judgment comes from experience, experience comes from bad judgment"
7.5" gauge Union Pacific Northern (4-8-4) 844
http://www.whitetrout.net/Chuck