David Brown wrote:

[snippage]

>In the meantime, it is quite possible to use gcc along with C-spy for
>debugging.  It's a mildly absurd system of compiling, linking,
>disassembling, assembling and linking again, and you miss symbolic
>information on variables (I suspect I could achieve that with some glue
>programs, but I keep putting it off while waiting for complete gdb-jtag),
>but it does work.

Are you going through these steps so you can produce a symbol table?  My
method (which does not produce symbols) is to:

/usr/local/msp430/bin/msp430-objcopy -O ihex analog analog.hex
/usr/local/msp430/bin/msp430-objdump -dSt analog > analog.lst

and just view the listing file while I'm in C-Spy.

>In the long term, the msp compiler market is going to be split between gcc
>(for those that want the top quality code, or want a more hands-on
approach,
>and are not scared off by lack of a telephone support line and gcc's "great
>once you've got it working" image) and ImageCraft (for those that want a
>neat, pre-packaged compiler and debugger with excellent commercial support
>for a modest cost).  Once ImageCraft have completed their compiler (they
are
>in alpha/beta testing now) and debugger, I suspect they will quickly become
>the dominant choice for those looking for a commercial compiler.

Richard has an excellent product.  I use the AVR compiler, since I feel it's
more stable and better rounded than the current implementations of GCC and
the libraries.  These are steadily improving, and may be ready for prime
time, but I see enough traffic about problems that I'm still a little gun
shy.

Richard provides excellent support, and the front end of the compiler is
well tested, and is ANSI certified.  The code generator is pretty good, and
regularly improving.  Except for a few of the lesser common string functions
supporting one of the arguments being in FLASH, the libraries are complete.

What ICC does have that I'd love to see an implementation of for both the
MSP430 and the AVR is the code compressor.  This is similiar in principle to
a common sub-expression eliminator in the compiler.  It looks for repeated
code blocks and converts them to subs.  It's quite effective, and I've seen
around 20% compression.  However, it's only available in the $500 package,
which puts it out the range of most hobbiests.

--John



Reply via email to