Re: KEil bought by ARM

In article <87mzkrdzxj.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, John Devereux
<jdREMOVE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
>"larwe" <zwsdotcom@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> Chris Hills wrote:
>>
>> > Actually Open Source is no match for good commercial compilers in so
>> > many ways.
>>
>> Mmm, you know I was rebuilding an old version of arm-elf-gcc just a
>> couple of days ago, and I thought "If only this was a proprietary
>> compiler, I'd be able to spend two weeks and thousands of dollars
>> finding the right dongle version on eBay - and an old computer to work
>> with it - so that I could run this old compiler again for a legacy
>> project that only needs a two-line code change".
>
>Also, even if you accept that the commercial compilers are "better" at
>code generation (I have not seen this):
>
>- gcc is getting better and better. Presumably there is a limit to how
> good a commercial compiler can be, so any gap should be closing.

It's not closing. Gcc is still about a decade behind. I get that figure
independently from several compiler vendors and tool makers. In places
Gcc is apparently an appalling mess.

It is certainly not a sensible choice for quite a few architectures.

>- code space and MHz are getting cheaper and cheaper, so it makes less
> and less difference anyway as time goes on.

Not for embedded systems or the 8 bit market would have disappeared LONG
ago.

What is 50 cents sent difference on the MCU? well multiply it by 50K per
hear and you get some idea! then there is the additional cost of the
memory, the more complex PCB... the cost is on a size* pads* holes type
equation. it all ads up and 1 dollar per board is 50,000 dollars per
year.

The other problem is EMC... many want to run the MCU SLOWER not faster.

>- It is getting easier and easier to justify using 32 bit parts (like
> ARM) in new designs.

YEs for some but there is a LONG way to go (if at all) before it will
over take the 8 bit market.

>I would expect the architecture of these parts
> to more closely match gcc's abilities than, say, the 8051 where Keil
> have been the leader.

Yes Gcc can not hope to compete in the 8 and most 16 bit markets.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ chris@xxxxxxxxxxxx www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: GNUPro Development, v850
    ... GCC source repository, so you can tell why a change was made and when: ... Most of the things claimed you can't do with commercial compilers we can do with most of the ones we supply. ... Some suppliers - such as ByteCraft and ImageCraft - are happy to help any customer with these issues. ... The wildly different behaviour and efficiency was a quote from a support person at a GCC/Linux maintainer. ...
    (comp.arch.embedded)
  • Re: Moving from 8051 to AVR
    ... Actually it is almost impossible to do with Gcc. ... However it is *not* generally that easy with the commercial compilers ... I have used (dongle problems etc). ...
    (comp.arch.embedded)
  • Re: Very basic Fortran compiler question
    ... but it is far from being a conforming Fortran 9x processor. ... What are the differences between the gcc compilers and the commercial ... > The commercial compilers have support, documentation, regular updates, ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: GNUPro Development, v850
    ... GCC source repository, so you can tell why a change was made and when: ... even for the same target and version number. ... Most of the things claimed you can't do with commercial compilers we can do with most of the ones we supply. ...
    (comp.arch.embedded)
  • Re: IDE for Atmel ARM processor
    ... all our tests show that GCC produces almost ... I had to write CRC code for AVR assembler, ... On top of this in some commercial compilers when you put the highest ...
    (comp.arch.embedded)