Links
Discussion
Here is a discussion from the 68332 mailing list about which (68k) compiler to choose.
Date: 19971030
From: "Batke, Keith" <Keith.Batke@inteq.bhi-net.com>
To: "'Mot-68332-Apps@freeware.mcu.motsps.com'"
Subject: Microtec Compiler?
Does anyone use Microtec's compiler?
How do you like it?
Keith.Batke@inteq.com
Date: 19971031
From: Shay Collins <scollins@onramp.net>
To: Mot-68332-Apps@freeware.mcu.motsps.com
Subject: Re: Microtec Compiler?
It's a good compiler, but I can't say the same for their
tech support. If that's important to you, you should
probably look elsewhere. I've been using the Microtech
tools for about 5 years.
Date: 19971031
From: Dietmar Millinger <dietmar@vmars.tuwien.ac.at>
Organization: Department of Real-Time Systems, TU-Wien, Vienna
To: Mot-68332-Apps@freeware.mcu.motsps.com
Subject: Re: Microtec Compiler?
At our department the microtec compiler (dos and nt versions)
is in use. we developed software for the 68332. it worked fine,
although the software licence is too expensive in my opinion.
So check the gnu compilers too.
Date: 19971031
From: "Jim M Hartmann"<Jim_M_Hartmann@cidcn00002.cidc.cummins.com>
To: Mot-68332-Apps@freeware.mcu.motsps.com
Subject: Re: Microtec Compiler?
I use it. The compiler seems pretty good. It optimizes well and is pretty
fast. It has some limitations, for one, the section control is limited.
Some other compilers allow you to specify what memory section individual
objects will go in, Microtec only allows section control on a whole storage
class -- all constants for example. Section control turned out to be very
important in my project. I was very disappointed with Microtec's Xray
debugger for BDM and am now using SDS Singlestep.
I hear lots of good things about the Gnu compiler but have never tried it
myself. There are many others that offer evaluation copies, for example
SDS and Diab Data. Try compiling some code with each and look at the
assembly output. Look seriously at section control if you think it might
be important.
Good luck,
Jim Hartmann, Speaking for myself
Onan Corporation
Date: 19971031
From: MikeTurner@kemet.com (Mike Turner)
Organization: KEMET Electronics
To: Mot-68332-Apps@freeware.mcu.motsps.com ('Mot-68332-Apps@freeware.mcu.motsps.com')
Subject: Re: Microtec Compiler?
The compiler seems to work pretty well. I evaluated Microtec, SDS,
Diab and gnu by running a rather large complex machine control
program through them. All generated pretty good code although
gnu did not optimize nearly as well as say SDS. The only problem that
was a killer for me was Microtec's generating compiler errors
for some interesting preprocessor statements that I have spent
significant time developing. Microtec said the code was
correctly being parsed. Microsoft, SDS, Diab, and gnu compiled everything
and the code ran correctly (well, I could not run Microsoft
since I could not target the 68K). Outside of this problem, which most
people will never encounter, Microtec seemed to be pretty solid.
Date: 19971031
From: "Rajeev Rohatgi" <Rajeev@srsys.com>
Organization: Stanford Research Systems
To: Mot-68332-Apps@freeware.mcu.motsps.com
Subject: More on Compilers
I see a compiler thread here. Perhaps it's time
to share my shopping and post-shopping experience.
(Back in September I had asked for compiler
recommendations...)
SUMMARY
In a nutshell, I was disappointed by the sales
attention I received (or didn't receive) from
the various compiler vendors, esp. the industry
standard ones. I've worked as a physicist for
6 yrs and building scientific instruments for 5
and over the years have done a lot of varied
shopping. The C compiler vendors _collectively_
were singularly uninterested in making the sale,
and remarkably careless in whether they created
a good impression or not. It felt very much
like dealing with a monopoly vendor rather than
a competitive marketplace. Enough vague generalities.
I had my sales lead dropped (ie lost) by 2 industry
standard companies. One company took 2 weeks to
mail me their introductory advertising, after 6
weeks they have told me that their evaluation
CD-ROM is on its way. A number of companies asked
what I felt were interrogatory questions, ie out
of line for a beginning sales lead. Another
company published an 800 number in a leading journal
and interrogated me, then made me make two toll calls
(not 800 numbers) just to get the _price_ of their
product ! Is there anybody reading this who would
expect a company to provide better response after the
sale than before the sale ?
The following companies gave me the worst sales
experiences (alphabetical order): Diab, Green
Hills, Microtec.
IN CONTRAST,
Non U.S. compiler suppliers showed far superior
interest in making the sale, no pressure but prompt
courteous answers to all my questions, very open
with price information. I can specifically
recommend both Crossware (U.K., www.crossware.com)
and Hi-Tech (Australia, www.htsoft.com, US rep is
CMX www.cmx.com) for having had good interactions.
Plus their low-end compilers are way cheaper
than the industry standard US companies (though at the
low end you won't a Windows interface. If you care.)
One US company to keep an eye on is Metrowerks, hopefully
they'll have an embedded 68332 package in less than
a year.
Talking about price, I also think that $2000 is too
expensive for a 68332 C compiler, considering that
the 68332 sells for $15 these days, no longer $70 !
and considering what compilers for other processors
can be had for.
DECISION
I ended up buying Hi-Tech, for a couple of different
reasons -- I wanted a complete solution (HiTech
includes a source level serial port debugger for
which you incorporate their code into your ROM --
I haven't done this yet) -- the Crossware compiler
can be run with the Huntsville BDM debugger for
a solution that's pretty comparable total cost --
but Huntsville gave me misleading info at the time,
so I ruled Crossware out prematurely. I'm not
competent to make comparative judgements of output
code quality, but I've been totally satisfied in
this respect with the HiTech output.
If you're shopping now, you might ask whether the
package you're considering includes support for
the TBLU (table look-up) instructions -- this was
added to some later 68k derivatives incl the '332
and isn't in a lot of the mainline 68k processors.
(My colleagues using other processors drool when I
mention what it can do !) Crossware does support
TBLU, HiTech gave me a simple workaround so I can
use it.
MORE ABOUT HITECH EXPERIENCE
I've been very satisfied with the Tech Support I've
received from HiTech. They appear to be a small
outfit and may not have a lot of patience for
beginner level questions, (99% of what you need to
know is in the manual or source code anyway), but
they have come through for me more than once when
I've needed it.
Be prepared though that the interface looks 10 yr
old (DOS mode, single edit window) but _it_does_
everything_you_need ! I have found very satisfactory
operation with 4 DOS windows open under Win3.1 :
one for _my_ editor, one for the HiTech integrated
development environment (their editor), one for
my ROM burner, and one for my RS232* program so
I can talk to my board. I can turn around a new
pair of ROM in about 3 minutes, and have been
very pleased with rate of code development.
I also think their manual could do with a revision,
some features are not mentioned ('persistent'
attribute) and there are other small holes that
I wish had been more fully explained (I had
some headaches with sscanf(), though they're all
resolved now.)
I doubt anybody's manual or support would be
perfect though.
Best wishes to all out there !
Rajeev Rohatgi
Stanford Research Systems
408-744-9047
408-744-9049 FAX
rajeev@srsys.com
Date: 19971031
From: "Batke, Keith" <Keith.Batke@inteq.bhi-net.com>
To: "'Mot-68332-Apps@freeware.mcu.motsps.com'"
Subject: RE: Microtec Compiler?
Section control is exactly what is causing me to inquire about other
people's
experience with Microtec. We are also disappointed in our evaluation of
XRAY.
We are initiating eval of Green Hills Multi and SDS SingleStep.
Keith.Batke
Date: 19971031
From: Frank Henriquez <frank@ucla.edu>
To: Mot-68332-Apps@freeware.mcu.motsps.com
Subject: Re: More on Compilers
Metrowerks is Canadian, although they have a branch in the US.
I have a lot of experience with Metrowerks on the Macintosh, going back to
their early C/C++ and Pascal compilers for the PowerPC and 68K.
Their compilers and IDE are top notch, and the company is fantastic; you
can post a message on one of the related Usenet newsgroups and often get a
response from a Metrowerks programmer within hours or a day - the same goes
for direct e-mail. In some cases, even the CEO will jump in! Their customer
support is extraordinary, and they are *VERY* responsive to user comments,
suggestions, etc.
They have also released the API for their compiler plug-ins, so it's
relatively simple to code up a compiler that works within their excellent
IDE. I'm working on a simple C compiler for the MCF5206 ColdFire, based on
a public domain DOS compiler. The port hasn't been difficult so far - the
hardest part has been to modify the compiler to produce ColdFire friendly
mnemonics!
They currently have a Windows compiler..in fact, they seem to have an IDE
for just about every high performance device in existence, including one
for the Sony Playstation.
I'm not sure what their embedded compiler prices are, but the standard Mac*
package is about $400 for a year's "subscription" (two CDs) that includes
their IDE, debugger, 68K/PPC C/C++ compiler, Pascal compiler and a Java
compiler.
When they entered the Mac* development market, they took the market away
from Symantec within a year...it'll be interesting to see what happens when
they enter the embedded market in full force.
I don't work for Metrowerks - just a satisfied customer. Here's their URL:
www.metrowerks.com/
Frank Henriquez Programmer/Analyst Jules Stein Eye Institute, UCLA
frank@ucla.edu
