[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE
From: |
Vincent Trouilliez |
Subject: |
Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE |
Date: |
Tue, 30 Aug 2005 09:26:24 +0200 |
> Please believe me when I say I'm not being mean or uncharitable,
I believe you :-)
> when
> I counter with:
>
> If you feel like you want/need an IDE, go right ahead and
> write or port one.
I want IDE to save me time. Spending my life to write an IDE (assuming I
had the skills, which I clearly don't ! ;o), would be very counter
productive I think ! ;-)
> Personally, I'd rather see developer
> cycles spent on improved code generation, wider chip support,
> and library enhancements.
Hmmm, sure can't disagree with, the quality of the core
components/back-ends is essential, but may I counter you with (to steal
your phrase ;-P ) :
1) avr-gcc and avr-libc must already be pretty mature already (otherwise
you wouldn't waste your valuable time with them, nor trust them for
professional/work related applications, I presume ;o), and since the C
language and AVR core aren't going to change anytime soon, we are not
really trying to catch a moving target unlike Desktop Linux as a whole.
So what is done (and works) can be taken for granted. Sure we can always
fix bugs here and there and do this and that, but it basically works
pretty well as it is, I gather.
So I don't think it would hurt the end user/programmer that much, if 5%
of the total dev time of gcc-avr, was spent in cooperating (if it is
technically necessary, don't know) with IDE devs.
2) But, more importantly, the point is that as always in such cases in
Linux software... the guys who want an IDE are likely not the same that
work on the command line tools. So whatever job is done or not done on
the IDE, it's not gonna steal a single split second of development time
on the command line tools ! So whatever comes IDE wise, it will hardly
come at the expense of the existing command lien tools ! So, you can
sleep on both ears I think ;o)
> I certainly don't personally regard this as a war; but I have to
> admit to knowing people who do.
Me neither, I have been in this list for only 3 days and I feel I
already post too much and fuel threads... I better restrain myself if I
don't want my posts to be moderated, or be banned altogether ! ;-P
Anyway, just received my AVR chip, building the Bryan's parport cable
and hoping to get the thing come to life sometime today !! :o)))
Regards,
--
Vince
- Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE [WAS: UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?], (continued)
- Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE [WAS: UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?], E. Weddington, 2005/08/30
- Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE [WAS: UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?], Joerg Wunsch, 2005/08/30
- Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE [WAS: UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?], David Kelly, 2005/08/30
- Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE [WAS: UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?], Brian Dean, 2005/08/30
- Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE [WAS: UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?], Kingston Co., 2005/08/31
- Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE [WAS: UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?], Brian Dean, 2005/08/31
- Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE [WAS: UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?], Richard Urwin, 2005/08/31
- Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE [WAS: UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?], David Brown, 2005/08/30
- Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE [WAS: UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?], E. Weddington, 2005/08/30
- Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE [WAS: UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?], Andy Warner, 2005/08/30
- Re: [avr-chat] AVR IDE,
Vincent Trouilliez <=
- Re: [avr-chat] UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?, E. Weddington, 2005/08/29
- Re: [avr-chat] UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?, Vincent Trouilliez, 2005/08/29
- Re: [avr-chat] UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?, E. Weddington, 2005/08/29
Re: [avr-chat] UISP / AVRDude : what to choose ?, E. Weddington, 2005/08/27