We are running a survey to help us improve the experience for all of our members. If you see the survey appear, please take the time to tell us about your experience if you can.
Hello, I was browsing through older posts that deal with the painful issue of portability (http://www.keil.com/forum/docs/thread8109.asp). I was (and still am) a big advocate of programming as much as possible conforming to the C standard, and having a layered structure that allowed "plugging-in" other hardware. But I have come to change my mind recently. I am reading the "ARM system developer's guide" (excellent book by the way. I'm reading it because I want to port some C167 code to an ARM9 environment) in which chapter 5 discusses writing efficient C code for an ARM. The point is, and it is fairly demonstrated, that even common, innocent looking C code can either be efficient of very inefficient on an ARM depending on specific choices made, let alone another processor used! So, if we are talking about squeezing every clock cycle out of a microcontroller - I do not believe that portability without ultimately littering the code is possible!
battery powered underwater fish tracker
20 years ago I sat at the next desk along from a guy who was writing the software for one of those.
Sticking as close to a standard helps force the focus onto quality, features, and price... just like you/we should be doing.
For some reason I seem to have great difficulty following your posts. Is that actually your point?
I've used 'other' editors, but I'm totally hooked on CodeWrite too (alas, only V6.0c though).
I am curious - what does it do that the average editor built into the average IDE (eg uVision) doesn't?
I've used 'other' editors, but I'm totally hooked on CodeWright too (alas, only V6.0c though).
I do not know much about "the average editor" I have used brief (the predecessor) and CodeWright exclusively for years.
however, here are a few of the features that I missed (in the old days) in other editors susbsttutuig in a highlightred column only (un)indenting several lines in one click substituting across newlines upper/lower casing a block (highlighted field) auto positioning smart formatting
all the above user configurable
I think the unique features I use the most is the column based features.
Erik
<ii>battery powered underwater fish tracker. 20 years ago I sat at the next desk along from a guy who was writing the software for one of those.
Nope, Wasn't me. I just used that as an obscure example.
For some reason I seem to have great difficulty following your posts.
Sorry.
Either I am to re-evaluate how I post, which I'm sure could use much improvement--if not a huge dose of brevity--or, I should just shrug that statement off as some tightly packed tin can of ignorance. Not sure yet. ;)
.... Is that actually your point?
Yes.
CodeWright is an Emacs class of editor running on the PC. uVision's IDE is not.
en.wikipedia.org/.../Emacs
en.wikipedia.org/.../CodeWright
I read somewhere that when it comes to choosing an editor, its like choosing a wife. I'd say that's a close analogy.
Once you get really good an using an editor, your ability to write/edit code skyrockets. I've had to watch other code-monkeys use their IDE and it is painful as you wait for them to do things that are a snap with a better editing tool.
erik, what version of CodeWright do you use? how can I upgrade mine from V6.0c?
--Cpt. Vince Foster 2nd Cannon Place Fort Marcy Park, VA
OH! and this one too! (my second 'wife'...)
en.wikipedia.org/.../Brief_(text_editor)
erik, what version of CodeWright do you use? 6.5a how can I upgrade mine from V6.0c? I do not know if you can upgrade, but googling on 'Codewright price" got me this one www.superwarehouse.com/.../1499769 that has 7.5 for sale at ~$300
I have seen no need/dsire to upgrade, is there significant problems with your release? what I have is just very minor nuisances.
Yes, I was aware thai it wasn't you and also aware that it was an obscure example, which was precisely what amused me.
Let's see whether this helps you decide:
The difficulty I have is that the content of your posts is so rambling and unfocussed it it difficult to figure out what you're actually trying to say, if anything. Perhaps you just like to talk.
Let me stress that my comments are not intended to be rude, just honest. However, I won't be at all surprised if you take them the wrong way. Most people would.
In that case I'm surprised that you see value in some of the opinions that you seem to be in agreement with.
Sure. Ok, I'll rephrase the question: What does an Emacs class of editor give you that you actually use which provides a real benefit in terms of development efficiency over the average editor supplied with an IDE?
I see a lot of criticism of Keil's editor and IDE from one of the regular contributors to this forum, I've always harboured the impression that he either hasn't them or can't be bothered to learn how to use them rather than there being a real reason.
Can you give any specific examples? It may be the case that most modern editors have caught up with most of the features that are really useful - and somebody is keeping it a secret from you.
Thanks for the feedback there. I shall keep that in mind. Sorry, I'll work on that. (I guess I do like to talk)
What does an Emacs class of editor give you that you actually use which provides a real benefit in terms of development efficiency over the average editor supplied with an IDE?
I would say that most of all, it is the familiarity of the editing tool as I go from one IDE to another: uVision, CodeComposer, CodeWarrior, Libero, Matlab, etc. (They don't have the Brief keymaping. After WordStar, Brief was "it" for me).
Like erik said, the column based commands that help a lot. Also, the ability to customize the editor's color coding schema helps, the simple toupper/tolower utilities, the ability to control editing operations with limited scope, the ability to include files within the 'project' that are not part of the officially compiled source code, 'templates', the ability to centralize mulitiple projects under one roof (and be able to perform operations across them), highly flexable printing operations, spell checking, the ability to create a custom build processes, keystroke recording and playback, and the extensive fish-tracking toolset and library.
And then you get into the meat-n-bones to an Emacs editor, where you can create your own functions and editing operations.
Even if they did catch up on the features, they would need to be consistant on how to invoke them in order to be useful. I don't want to remember that Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F7 does a tolower operation on one IDE, while Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F7 deletes the contents of the current directory on another IDE.
I think *they* (most IDE's) are using the CUA keymaping (?not sure?), and although it is Windows notepad compatable, it was very limited...
(I'm sure this is NOT an exhaustive list of commands, I just google'd it and this came up...)
CUA Keyboard: www.lugaru.com/.../CUA.Keyboard.html
Brief Keyboad: www.lugaru.com/.../Brief.Emulation.html
Erik,
No my version of CodeWright is not problematic. I don't currently need the latest version (7.5), but it would be nice just to have.
Mr. Smoked Sardine asks I am curious - what does it do that the average editor built into the average IDE (eg uVision) doesn't? finding my answer not exhaustive enough he posts What does an Emacs class of editor give you that you actually use which provides a real benefit in terms of development efficiency over the average editor supplied with an IDE? then, after requesting a more exhaustive answer he posts The difficulty I have is that the content of your posts is so rambling
do you have the cake you ate?
erac,,,,
i not be wanting pictueer of you!!!!!
my man rafar wanting new becuase it broken and toren.
he looking to gooogle and not seeing you and he be sadded!!!!!
you be on bebo and youtube?????
pleese you be having pictuer for man jafar?????
.. who I am, I see no reason to scare little children that might accidentially see my picture if it was on the web :)
rahib, sir erac:
If things goes on the this way, sir erac will have to following his own advise: start walking, and since that won't help (probably), switch to running !!!! :-)
I will be gone for a while, vacation time!
I meant of course,
"rahib, sir erac:
If things go on the this way, sir erac will have to follow his own advise: start walking, and since that won't help (probably), switch to running !!!! :-)
I will be gone for a while, vacation time!"
I wrote
So, if we are talking about squeezing every clock cycle out of a microcontroller - I do not believe that portability without ultimately littering the code is possible!
There are instances where code is not portable at all if it is desired to "squeeze every clock cycle out of a microcontroller" - try DSP for example - also because it is usually written in assembly only.
There are instances where code is not portable at all if it is desired to "squeeze every clock cycle out of a microcontroller" - try DSP for example - also because it is usually written in assembly only. the basest form of portablity is that any working code is a useful template for writing same for another processor, that goes for "device optimized C" as well.
assembly of ARM7 used on a ARM9 will not "squeeze every clock cycle of the processor".