Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Best OSS Embedded Development Platform
AchilleTalon writes "As many of you may know, there are two main competitors on the Windows platform for embedded software development, namely IAR and Keil. By embedded development, I mean development for microprocessors like the well known 8051 and the likes, not mobile platforms which include a complete OS in first place. I am seeking for alternatives to IAR and Keil in the OSS world. Even if I can find pieces of code here and there, I haven't found yet a fully integrated development platform. Does it exist? What do you use?"
http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/snap.php#Windows
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
I have used both IAR and KEIL, but I find using gnu tools far superior. For a number of reasons
* Dongles (ok they have license services too, but they are always more expensive).. If you 2 years after release find you need to do a emergency fix of your released software. You start by trying to find that dongle that is needed for the software.
* Licenses, when you need that quick fix, you can almost be certain that your license has expired
* Integration problem on the build servers.. When you are building on your local machine everything is fine and dandy. But trying to migrate that your build farm, good luck with that
* linker scripts.. when you need very esoteric features where you wanna lie your code in ROM, the gnu tools are just far superior in flexibility
* and I love to type make on the prompt and build the artifact.. instead of firing up som clunky IDE
Fine, don't use BeRTOS (or whatever RTOS). Ditch that and still use the free AVR avr-gcc compiler suite from Atmel along with Codelite and gdb that comes along for the ride.
I use GNU toolchain (GCC, Binutils, GDB) and Eclipse or Codeblocks. Setting it up takes some time, and can cause some headaches. Also not all hardware platforms and all emulators will work with this setup, but once you get it working, it has plenty advantages over commercial platforms.
One setup example for Texas Instruments Stellaris microcontrollers: http://kernelhacks.blogspot.com.es/2012/11/the-complete-tutorial-for-stellaris.html
When I cannot use GNU tools, I usually use Keil or CodeComposer Studio (this is only for Texas Instruments stuff).
Good IDEs have ways to search across symbols, source files, etc. They allow you to quickly search for references to symbols. They allow integration of one-click compiler-error/warning-to-source jumps. They do static analysis and performance profiling. They have easy ways of pausing execution modifying code and resuming execution. They let you use version control from inside them. They have plug-in oriented debuggers that let you write simple visualizations for your own datastructures and much much more. All of those things save development time. Thankfully the vast majority of programmers these days have a choice for using an IDE. Nobody sane would want to maintain Makefiles, unless it was the only option. Your opinion of people who use IDEs is outdated propaganda.
One very seldom uses the standalone 8051 but rather the 8051 core.
Because of the simplicity and small size of the core there are plenty of specialized ICs out there with an embedded 8051 code.
The most obvious application is one chip radio solutions. Instead of having to use both a 1-chip radio and a micro-controller you get them both in a single package. This is great for high end small size remote controls where you might want to do some bidirectional authorization or just signal back that the message got through in cases where the result isn't obvious.
Good IDEs have ways to search across symbols, source files, etc. They allow you to quickly search for references to symbols. They allow integration of one-click compiler-error/warning-to-source jumps.
So does Emacs.
They do static analysis and performance profiling.
No, they don't.
They have easy ways of pausing execution modifying code and resuming execution.
On an embedded system you should not be able to do that at all.
They let you use version control from inside them.
What for?
They have plug-in oriented debuggers that let you write simple visualizations for your own datastructures and much much more.
The less a programmer touches a debugger, the less bugs are in the code.
All of those things save development time.
Those features are training wheels and crutches. If you can benefit from them, you are not supposed to work on the project in the first place.
Thankfully the vast majority of programmers these days have a choice for using an IDE.
The vast majority of programmers these days have negative performance outcome -- more time is spent by others fixing their mistakes than would be spent working without them.
Nobody sane would want to maintain Makefiles, unless it was the only option.
If it's difficult for you to add a source file to a Makefile, it's impossible for you to write that file.
Your opinion of people who use IDEs is outdated propaganda.
Not of people who use IDEs -- people who NEED IDEs.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Unless you are supporting a legacy system
You really don't know about the embedded world :)
8051s are everywhere, and growing in number, astonishingly. For instance, the latest bluetooth low energy endpoint controllers from Phillips come with... an embedded 8051. Basically every piece of hardware that needs some sort of noddy low power controller and isn't especially demanding on it will probably use an 8051.
The thing is they are cheap, unencumbered, plenty of cell and layout libraries exist, development tools ar ready made, they clock into hundreds of MHz and do the job well enough.
I would not be overly surprised if the 8051 instruction set outlasts x86, to be honest.
Sure, you don't get free-floating 8051s any more (on the low end there are other controllers like PIC which are cheaper and lower power) and on the high end, everything beats them. But for everything else, they are ubiquitous.
SJW n. One who posts facts.