Lpc2000

Hi,

I will be starting a new project using the LPC2114 and I have to 
decide on an IDE to do the development. I have been considering the 
Rowley Crossworks and IAR Embedded Workbench. I know they are very 
different in price ($800 vs $3000), but when doing professional work 
the price difference is less important than the quality of the 
tools. Is the quality of the code from the proprietary compiler of 
IAR significantly better that the GCC compiler of Crossworks. Do 
either of these products have an advantage in terms of features or 
stability or support.  Does anyone have an experience that would 
help me make the right choice. Is there another IDE that I should 
consider. I know the IAR and Rowley read this group, so if you would 
prefer, you can email me directly. Thanks for your help. As I become 
more knowledgeable about the LPC2xxx, I hope to return the favor.

Bob Davis

Just out of curiosity, why do you feel compelled to use an IDE?

    --jc

rkd0930home wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I will be starting a new project using the LPC2114 and I have to
> decide on an IDE to do the development. I have been considering the
> Rowley Crossworks and IAR Embedded Workbench. I know they are very
> different in price ($800 vs $3000), but when doing professional work
> the price difference is less important than the quality of the
> tools. Is the quality of the code from the proprietary compiler of
> IAR significantly better that the GCC compiler of Crossworks. Do
> either of these products have an advantage in terms of features or
> stability or support.  Does anyone have an experience that would
> help me make the right choice. Is there another IDE that I should
> consider. I know the IAR and Rowley read this group, so if you would
> prefer, you can email me directly. Thanks for your help. As I become
> more knowledgeable about the LPC2xxx, I hope to return the favor.
>
> Bob Davis

Hello,

We have the same problem at the moment.

We consider the Hitech system (www.hitech.com.au) -

or a chinese system with the GNU compiler and a JTAG debugger 
(www.embedinfo.com).

Anybody has experience with these?

Somebody asked why one would need an integrated development system. 
Answer: just for the debugger - not for the compiler and linker, 
since "make" is a tool with much more options than any IDE I saw up 
to now.

Regards

Thomas Leuthner

--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "thomasleuthner" <thomas@m...> wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> We have the same problem at the moment.
> 
> We consider the Hitech system (www.hitech.com.au) -
> 
> or a chinese system with the GNU compiler and a JTAG debugger 
> (www.embedinfo.com).
> 
> Anybody has experience with these?
> 
> Somebody asked why one would need an integrated development system. 
> Answer: just for the debugger - not for the compiler and linker, 
> since "make" is a tool with much more options than any IDE I saw up 
> to now.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Thomas Leuthner

Hi 

I have also seen that Hitech have a ARM compiler and an IDE.
I have downloaded the compiler and read some of the manual and sent
them som questions !

Here they are
I have downloaded the ARM Evaluation C compiler.
1)Is is possible to use JTAG debug with the compiler together with ex.
Philips LPC2104 ?
2)I can not find anything about JTAG in the USER Manual ??

3)Is the compiler based on GNU or is it your own work ?

The answers from HItech

1) I am not 100% about the JTAG for Philips LPC2104. Hi-Tide uses 
Seehau ARM
debugger to debug the chips. I believe they do, but you might want to 
contact them
directly to confirm.

2) The manual does not mention debugger for the reason that it is a 
third party
tool. You should be able to find some info on it in "getting started" 
guide.

3) The compiler is our own work. You should find it fairly easy to 
use if you have
worked with gcc in the past, as both of them are ANSI C compliant and 
quite a few
compiler options in our compilers mirror those found in gcc.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

I am self considering  compiler and IDE. I think I will go for IAR or
Rowley

Best regards

John Noergaard

I am not compelled to use an IDE. When I write code I like to step 
through it to insure that it does what I intended. I find an IDE to 
be a convenient way to do this. If I find a mistake, and I do make 
mistakes, I edit the source, compile, link, load and continue 
stepping. This way I very rarely have bugs in released code. Every 
one has their own way of working. This works for me. Now back to my 
question. Do you have any suggestions about IDEs for the LPC2114?

Hi,

take a look at the Keil IDE, the ARM support eval is for free (full 
GNU compiler, 16K limited debugger). Its the best and most integrated 
IDE, while still giving you the options to set command line 
arguments. So far, their simulator is the best I have seen. One 
button does it all. Very stable too.

Hi Bob,
 
Have you considered Ashling?. We offer a complete range of development tools
including:
 
LPC2xxx Evaluation Board with on-board JTAG emulator 
.Integrated Development Environment and Compiler (GNU based)
.Source-level Debugger 
.Stand-alone USB based JTAG Emulator 
.Stand-alone USB/Ethernet based JTAG Emulator with Real Time Trace support
 
Where are you based ? Let me know and I can get our local office to contact
you. Feel free to send me any questions. For more details on our tools see
our dedicated LPC2000 page (includes FAQ) at the link below:

Hugh @ http://www.ashling.com/support/lpc2100/ 

 -----Original Message-----
From: rkd0930home [mailto:rkd0930@...] 
Sent: 14 March 2004 21:58
To: lpc2000@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 08.82/05.00] [lpc2000] Choosing an IDE for
the LPC2114



Hi,

I will be starting a new project using the LPC2114 and I have to 
decide on an IDE to do the development. I have been considering the 
Rowley Crossworks and IAR Embedded Workbench. I know they are very 
different in price ($800 vs $3000), but when doing professional work 
the price difference is less important than the quality of the 
tools. Is the quality of the code from the proprietary compiler of 
IAR significantly better that the GCC compiler of Crossworks. Do 
either of these products have an advantage in terms of features or 
stability or support.  Does anyone have an experience that would 
help me make the right choice. Is there another IDE that I should 
consider. I know the IAR and Rowley read this group, so if you would 
prefer, you can email me directly. Thanks for your help. As I become 
more knowledgeable about the LPC2xxx, I hope to return the favor.

Bob Davis



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor	

ADVERTISEMENT
 
<http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12cmh4hfe/M=267637.4673018.5833253.1261774/D=egroup
web/S=1706554205:HM/EXP=1079387950/A=1945638/R=0/SIG=11tq357ai/*http://www.n
etflix.com/Default?mqso=60178383&partid=4673018> click here	
 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=267637.4673018.5833253.1261774/D=egroupweb
/S=:HM/A=1945638/rand=329639084> 	


  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links


*	To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpc2000/
  

*	To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lpc2000-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:lpc2000-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> 
  

*	Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

Hi Bob,

It's worth asking the question:

Does the IDE support integrated Flash download and debug?

This means that from an IDE you can set breakpoints in the editor, press
a button and the IDE will program the flash, set the breakpoints (both
of them :-<) and start the processor executing etc etc.

CrossWorks for ARM can do this using either the Primary or the Secondary
JTAG pins of the LPC2000 family and can program the flash at 16Kbytes
per second using a standard wiggler or equivalent (our favourite is the
OLIMEX JTAG ARM). 

Regards
Michael

Hi,

there have been many ports to support the LPC2000 family already.
Ashling, Hitech, IAR, Keil, Rowley just to name some of them (in
alphabetical order). Also the ARM RealView and GHS support the family. 
In my personal opinion, the most important consideration is what you
used so far rather than the difference in features. If you are a
migrating 51-customer and you used IAR or Keil and you were satisfied,
the logical choice is to stay with them. Same is true if you are
migrating from PIC and used Hitech or from MSP430 / AVR and used IAR,
stay with them if you like the IDE. Another consideration is what kind
of debugger / emulator you want to use. If Ashling is your first
choice, you might also want to use their compiler port (single source
supply). If Nohau is your favorite, they work closely with Hitech and
IAR. If Hitex is your favorite, the closest partner is Keil. If you
use a standard wiggler, Rowley seems to work very reliably.

The long story short, there are too many combinations to recommend an
IDE that suits everyone. 

Some statements have already been made:
Rowley works nicely with Olimex tools
Keil has the best simulator (helpful for more than 1 breakpoint in
flash memory)
In general dedicated compiler such as GHS, ARM, IAR and the new kid on
the block Hitech have a little better code-density than a GNU-based
compiler. Whether that is important for you, you decide. 

Summary: there are a lot of mature tools on the market and you might
want to get an evaluation version, compile some code and compare the
results based on your own code. You will also see the difference in
look and feel between the tools you will evaluate. A lot of the like /
dislike is personal taste.

Hope I did not offend any of our tool partners while still providing
some useful information ;-)

Regards, Robert

I would consider using keil uVision in cooperation with ADS(arm
develper studio) compiler/linker.

/Pero

---
Monday, March 15, 2004, 6:20:22 PM, si napisal:

> Hi,

> there have been many ports to support the LPC2000 family already.
> Ashling, Hitech, IAR, Keil, Rowley just to name some of them (in
> alphabetical order). Also the ARM RealView and GHS support the family.
> In my personal opinion, the most important consideration is what you
> used so far rather than the difference in features. If you are a
> migrating 51-customer and you used IAR or Keil and you were satisfied,
> the logical choice is to stay with them. Same is true if you are
> migrating from PIC and used Hitech or from MSP430 / AVR and used IAR,
> stay with them if you like the IDE. Another consideration is what kind
> of debugger / emulator you want to use. If Ashling is your first
> choice, you might also want to use their compiler port (single source
> supply). If Nohau is your favorite, they work closely with Hitech and
> IAR. If Hitex is your favorite, the closest partner is Keil. If you
> use a standard wiggler, Rowley seems to work very reliably.

> The long story short, there are too many combinations to recommend an
> IDE that suits everyone. 

> Some statements have already been made:
> Rowley works nicely with Olimex tools
> Keil has the best simulator (helpful for more than 1 breakpoint in
> flash memory)
> In general dedicated compiler such as GHS, ARM, IAR and the new kid on
> the block Hitech have a little better code-density than a GNU-based
> compiler. Whether that is important for you, you decide. 

> Summary: there are a lot of mature tools on the market and you might
> want to get an evaluation version, compile some code and compare the
> results based on your own code. You will also see the difference in
> look and feel between the tools you will evaluate. A lot of the like /
> dislike is personal taste.

> Hope I did not offend any of our tool partners while still providing
> some useful information ;-)

> Regards, Robert




 
> Yahoo! Groups Links

I worked with the Ashling tools too.

Consider them if you need a good hardware board.

But their debugger constantly runs into a "no more hardware 
resources - free hardware resources" issue when stepping through code 
without explaining what resource is missing or how to free resources 
(sigh). This may be related to the single hardware breakpoint 
problem. This makes debugging a bit annoying. It's easier to do your 
debugging using Keil's simulator, or Printf style debugging.

Another problem with the Ashling tools is the integrated Flash 
download. it doesen't work well and used to be quite slow, so we 
resorted to use the Philips provided ISP tool again.

--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "golssa" <golssa@y...> wrote:
> I worked with the Ashling tools too.
> 
> Consider them if you need a good hardware board.
> 
> But their debugger constantly runs into a "no more hardware 
> resources - free hardware resources" issue when stepping through 
code 
> without explaining what resource is missing or how to free
resources 
> (sigh). This may be related to the single hardware breakpoint 
> problem. This makes debugging a bit annoying. It's easier to do
your 
> debugging using Keil's simulator, or Printf style debugging.
> 
> Another problem with the Ashling tools is the integrated Flash 
> download. it doesen't work well and used to be quite slow, so we 
> resorted to use the Philips provided ISP tool again.

I'm a sucker for gcc + gdb/insight. I use this on both Winxx(with 
Cygwin) and Linux and have used these to deliver product. No gripes.  
This combo is not strickly an IDE...

VIDE, which is a true IDE,  http://www.objectcentral.com/, works with 
gcc/gdb 

All these tools are free to download and run on various hosts...

Hi Golssa,
I'm surprised about your comments re:flash programming/debugging using
Ashling tools. What version of our tools are you using ? We completely
rewrote our flash programming algorithm in v112 (released in January) and
now support programming at > 12KB/s. Also, the EmbeddedICE only has two
hardware breakpoints. If you have a breakpoint set and then attempt to step
there may be certain situations where the debugger needs two breakpoints
(PathFinder attempts to complete the full step as an atomic operation).
PathFinder shows hardware breakpoints in the Source/Disa/Breakpoint dialog
as a small blue icon (software are shown in red); in this situation, you
have to clear the breakpoint you set. Contact me off line if you need
details on upgrading.
 
 
Of interest to Ashling customers is that v113 will be available to all
registered users for download next week. This release adds flash support for
all the new LPC derivatives and support for code protection; in addition,
our entry level kit (for 295 euro) is now code size limited to 32KB (rather
than previously been limited to 60-days).
 



Hugh @  <http://www.ashling.com/support/lpc2100/>
http://www.ashling.com/support/lpc2100/ 

-----Original Message-----
From: golssa [mailto:golssa@...] 
Sent: 15 March 2004 23:17
To: lpc2000@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [lpc2000] Re: Choosing an IDE for the LPC2114


I worked with the Ashling tools too.

Consider them if you need a good hardware board.

But their debugger constantly runs into a "no more hardware 
resources - free hardware resources" issue when stepping through code 
without explaining what resource is missing or how to free resources 
(sigh). This may be related to the single hardware breakpoint 
problem. This makes debugging a bit annoying. It's easier to do your 
debugging using Keil's simulator, or Printf style debugging.

Another problem with the Ashling tools is the integrated Flash 
download. it doesen't work well and used to be quite slow, so we 
resorted to use the Philips provided ISP tool again. 



  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links


*	To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpc2000/
  

*	To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lpc2000-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:lpc2000-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> 
  

*	Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

Hi Hugh,

I used 1.07. Hopefully 1.13 will be improved. Will the upgrade (from 
60-days to 32KBytes) be automatic for the entry level kit?

--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "Hugh O'Keeffe" <hugh.okeeffe@a...> 
wrote:
> Hi Golssa,
> I'm surprised about your comments re:flash programming/debugging 
using
> Ashling tools. What version of our tools are you using ? We 
completely
> rewrote our flash programming algorithm in v112 (released in 
January) and
> now support programming at > 12KB/s. Also, the EmbeddedICE only has 
two
> hardware breakpoints. If you have a breakpoint set and then attempt 
to step
> there may be certain situations where the debugger needs two 
breakpoints
> (PathFinder attempts to complete the full step as an atomic 
operation).
> PathFinder shows hardware breakpoints in the Source/Disa/Breakpoint 
dialog
> as a small blue icon (software are shown in red); in this 
situation, you
> have to clear the breakpoint you set. Contact me off line if you 
need
> details on upgrading.
>  
>  
> Of interest to Ashling customers is that v113 will be available to 
all
> registered users for download next week. This release adds flash 
support for
> all the new LPC derivatives and support for code protection; in 
addition,
> our entry level kit (for 295 euro) is now code size limited to 32KB 
(rather
> than previously been limited to 60-days).
>  
> 
> 
> 
> Hugh @  <http://www.ashling.com/support/lpc2100/>
> http://www.ashling.com/support/lpc2100/ 
> 
>  
>  
> 
>   
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: golssa [mailto:golssa@y...] 
> Sent: 15 March 2004 23:17
> To: lpc2000@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [lpc2000] Re: Choosing an IDE for the LPC2114
> 
> 
> I worked with the Ashling tools too.
> 
> Consider them if you need a good hardware board.
> 
> But their debugger constantly runs into a "no more hardware 
> resources - free hardware resources" issue when stepping through 
code 
> without explaining what resource is missing or how to free 
resources 
> (sigh). This may be related to the single hardware breakpoint 
> problem. This makes debugging a bit annoying. It's easier to do 
your 
> debugging using Keil's simulator, or Printf style debugging.
> 
> Another problem with the Ashling tools is the integrated Flash 
> download. it doesen't work well and used to be quite slow, so we 
> resorted to use the Philips provided ISP tool again. 
> 
> 
> 
>   _____  
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> *	To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpc2000/
>   
> 
> *	To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> lpc2000-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:lpc2000-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> 
>   
> 
> *	Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of 
Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .