I,ve installed the Compiler and I can,t get even the simplest code to compile properely.
Anyone know where the fix for this bug is?
Or is it a limit of the demonstration version?
void main(void) { cout << "Hello world!"; }
what is it the compileer you installled?
keil c????
if you be answer keil c then code you give is bad and not compiler
you code is c++ but compile is c
c not thinking about cout like this you be not good and give errror
Can someone answer my question in English please!
I said PART of marketing I said PART of the dream
Surely you would agree that it is always better to build upon what you know rather than always going for something different.
A skyscraper is built of same style blocks one upon another. If they were all different then the structure almost certainly wouldn't stand!
I do not need to define narrow minded - Just use your favourite search engine.
In this instance, dismissing C++ out of academic principal I would say is narrow minded.
Part of marketing is understanding what people want!
Of course. I would even say that all of marketing is understanding what people will want to buy, or what they can be made want to buy. It is all about business - if people will pay for it, then is is economically sensible for a company to make.
That, of course, does not mean at all that the product has to be technically sensible. What the customer does with the product does not concern the company, as long as they get paid.
I want to use C++ because I know C++.
We've already discussed this: If you know C++, then you also know C (if you do not know C, please stop claiming that you know C++).
I say that in the same way that I said I want a response in English. It is because I talk English!
I am sorry, but the hardware you have to work with isn't going to accomodate your wishes. Humans have this capability called "learning", while your hardware can only be used as-is, or replaced completely.
To do something you are familiar with is quicker than doing something totally foreign.
The concepts of C++ are totally foreign to your 8051. That is precisely why is does not make sense to try programming it in C++.
Hello ? The other posters on this thread are experienced embedded developers. That means they have already written code for real-life projects that are being sold on the market. Their views and opinions stem from years of practical, hands-on experience with the 8051 architecture.
The person who has a purely academic point of view is you.
sir filip
you be needing project work soon?
i help you please
i say send info and i see what to do for work
if working c then you think be happy yes??
I know what it means. I'm just very curious to know what you think it means.
It is an academcial goal to use as high-level language as possible for all development. It a practical rule to not use a higher-level tool than the target can handle in a good way. You call our arguments academical???
Many of us _are_ experienced C++ developers, which is something you seems to constantly ignore.
Don't you wonder just a little bit why I claim to be an experienced C++ developer, and still says that C is a better language to use for a '51 chip?
Don't you get a feeling that there _may_ be parts of the equation that you haven't seen yet?
How long was it since you left school?
How many real projects (embedded or not) have you worked with?
Haven't you noticed that real projects tend to have a large number of mutually exclusive requests - something that didn't exist in school assignments. In real projects, you always have to compromise!
"I do not need to define narrow minded - Just use your favourite search engine"
Just tried doing a search for that on my favourite search engine and got nothing!?
Trouble is, my favourite search engine is http://www.booble.com ;)
Maybe you should have been more specific.
I noticed the following comment upthread:
As I have said before: The problem you are going to run into if you use the Ceibo + Keil combination is that the evaluation version of Keil C51 only allows a code size of 4 kB. Any complex string formatting function (this includes printf and cout) will easily need upwards of 10 kB code space.
Compiling the following program with a recent version of C51:
#include <stdio.h> void main(void) { printf("Hello world\n"); while(1); }
Gave the following map:
BASE START END USED MEMORY CLASS ========================================================== X:000000H X:000000H X:007FFFH XDATA X:000000H X:000000H X:007FFFH HDATA C:000000H C:000000H C:007FFFH 000438H CODE C:000000H C:000000H C:007FFFH CONST C:000000H C:000000H C:007FFFH ECODE B00:0000H C:000000H C:007FFFH HCONST I:000000H I:000000H I:0000FFH 000001H IDATA I:000000H I:000000H I:00007FH 00001CH DATA I:000020H.0 I:000020H.0 I:00002FH.7 000001H.1 BIT
And in particular:
000003H 00035EH 00035CH BYTE UNIT CODE ?PR?PRINTF?PRINTF
Which shows the original statement to be out by more than an order of magnitude.
Presuming the person who made this statement is reasonably familiar with C51, how are we supposed to have any confidence in the commentary on the unsuitability of C++ when it would appear that none of the contributors have actually used any of the available implementations? Should we assume that their 'experience' really is sufficient?
If I am wrong in my assumption that none of the contributors to this thread have used C++ on an 8051 please do correct me. If you can provide any actual data to support the hypothesis that C++ is a non-starter on an 8051 I would be genuinely interested.
Jack,
Finally someone responds with a positive point of view :)
Up to that time all responses have been leaning towards the "I know better than you because I've got experience" style.
What there seems to have been lacking is the desire to try something that they are unfamiliar with.
The words new, dog, tricks and old in a different order seem to be appropriate for some here.
Note that JS showed an example saying that the Keil C compiler + linker (the buggy tool you have been recommended to use) is quite good.
That should not be extrapolated into believing that the '51 is a processor well suited to C++.
There is still problems with dyanmic memory, virtual methods, templated code etc.
I did not say, nor have I assumed, that the 8051 is well suited to C++.
I am hoping (and increasingly believing) that it CAN be successfully used.
Some investigation I have done has revealed that there is even a Java VM that runs on a derivative (the Dallas 80C400).
Java is interpreted, C++ is compiled. Both have the problems that you mention.
So if (yet another) supplier provides tools for such a high level language to be used, it implies that there are requirements that can be satisfied with such tools.
"Some investigation I have done has revealed that there is even a Java VM that runs on a derivative (the Dallas 80C400)."
True.
"TINI is available online at TINI Store for $67.00 which includes 1 MByte SRAM and 512 KBytes of Flash ROM."
Tiny footprint...
At this point I can contribute some real-life experience.
I have developed a couple of applications using Java on the Dallas 80C400 - Their name for the technology is TINI.
I had previously done a lot of work (more than 15 years worth) primarily in assembler and C on 8051 and V55 cores.
TINI was my first attempt of using such a high level language on the 8051 derivative (albeit a vastly souped-up one).
The result - The projects were written in time, to cost and within the constraints laid down by the hardware.
Fortunately, they were not time critical applications and they performed their function adequately and (most importantly) within specification requirements.
Then came another project.
The management wanted me to use the same basic platform; i.e., the 80C400 with TINI. Knowing what the project entailed, I was reluctant to us TINI on this project but I had my orders and decided to go along with the decision.
It very quickly became apparent that the setup just was not man enough for the job. I decided (unknown to the management at that time) to rewrite the application in C.
The result was that the application ran some 400 time faster in various critical sections than the equivalent TINI code. Yes, I do actually mean 400 times faster!
Fortunately (for me), the management agreed that I had made the right decision.
So ... my advice is this:
Yes you CAN consider and use C, C++, JAVA or any other high level language, but please also consider whether the resultant application is going to work in a satisfactory and acceptable manner for the customer.
Ok,
It's becoming clear that I can write on the 8051 in C++.
It may be inefficient code and need more resources than code which others write. But if I can write an application quickly with the confidence brought about by using tools I know then it should be worth the wrath of some forum members.
I don't understand why there are some guys that are so negative about certain suggestions.
Ok, Mr Henry Ford wanted to make money but part of the dream was to give transport to the masses.
You do know about the dodge lawsuit, right? He was forced to continue to seek profit rather than divert it into more production to "help the masses." His dream was overrode by profit demands of being a corporation.
"I don't understand why there are some guys that are so negative about certain suggestions."
Trying to compile C++ with a C compiler:
I,ve installed the Compiler and I can,t get even the simplest code to compile properely. Anyone know where the fix for this bug is?
On receiving an answer that it is a C compiler:
On experience with embedded compilers:
Why is the demonstration version so limited? It looks very weak! Microsofts free compiler can do so much more!
On receiving a good description of the problem, a note that the M$ compiler can't build for the '51 target, and that the C51 can't build C++ and that a trivial change to the code (to make it C code) would make the example buildable:
Someone give a more positive (and helpful) response please!
After having received a number of descriptions that C and C++ are different languages:
Why have a demo version that won,t compile my simple program?
After receiving a further note that C and C++ are different languages, and that a C compiler just can't compile C++:
Anyway, I need to know of alternatives and not just get you can,t do it style comments.
On the question: Can't you switch to C? Do you really need C++?
You make these comments without knowledge or appreciation of the requirement. My contract requires me to produce code for an 8052 controller board that has a keypad and a display. I need serious options please.
This implies that the chip 8052, or the keypad or the display is a direct implication why C++ is a requirement and not an option. It also implies that the answers you have received are not serious.
After receiving a number of notes that C++ are not the best of languages for the lowest end of microcontrollers, you translate unsuitable into impossible:
The general view from this forum is that C++ an the 8052 don't mix.
From then on, it's not meaningful to follow the thread anymore.
As you can (probably not) see, you entered this thread in a very narrow-minded way. The perfect way of entering a forum and ask questions...
View all questions in Keil forum