AVR-Chat

Cost perhaps, IAR is quite expensive.  According to an Atmel FAE I talked
to at a seminar IAR generates the most efficient assembly, GCC-AVR was in
second place and everything else was well behind that.  That seminar was
about 8 months ago, so who knows what is true now.

But you know what "they" say about opinions,
DLC

> So is there some vast source of ICC software ports that are available to
> use
> in commercial products?  I did see that some of the application note
> sample
> code is written in ICC.  Are there any other reasons to use ICC or IAR
> over
> AVRGCC?  Are the libraries more robust?
>
> Thanks
> Jim
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "AVR Development" <AVRDevelopment@znet.com>
> To: <AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 11:26 PM
> Subject: RE: [AVR-Chat] I Need A Compiler
>
>
>> Wait Wait, Nevermind.  The software ports that are available use either
>> IAR
>> or ICC so I know the IAR is far more expensive than the ICC.  ICC it is.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com] On
>> Behalf
>> Of David VanHorn
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:55 PM
>> To: AVR-Chat@yahoogroups.com
>> Subject: Re: [AVR-Chat] I Need A Compiler
>>
>> On 1/23/07, AVR Development <AVRDevelopment@
>> <mailto:AVRDevelopment%40znet.com> znet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I need a compiler for ATmega64 and ATmega1281. Our budget is limited. I
>>> have the free GCC compiler that comes with WinAVR and I use that in AVR
>>> Studio. Is there any reason why I should upgrade to the ICC
>>> compiler? Are
>>> there advantages in features and performance?
>>
>> Would codevision work for you? It's a BIG step between GCC and IAR.
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>