emIDE vs. uVision

Thanks, I'll try.
What are the restrictions?
Code size limit?
Can I use my J-Link EDU, or do I have to buy a ULINK2?

I use GNU/GCC outside of Keil, so really couldn't tell you. I prefer more powerful editors and source analysis tools.

I'd expect the J-Link to work, EDU or not, and there to be a 32KB limit on the debugger in the evaluation version. It would take you a matter of minutes to verify.

It would take you a matter of minutes to verify.

But why go to the trouble when you think you can get someone on a forum to do it for you.

Reminds me of what my 22 year old son did recently. Him in his bedroom, me in the sitting room. The phone rings. I answer. It's him. "Dad, bring me up a cup of water".

(I didn't)

Hmmm...
Is it normal that instead of providing an answer, you are making fun of the
user of this forum?

I think I will invest a bit of time and see how the free tool chains such
as emIDE and maybe emblocks work for me.

Is in this is reason why there is such a support forum?
I'll get back and tell you how it went.

This is a user forum, customers with licenses have other direct support options for their questions.

A quick browse of the forum would indicate most responses come from consultants and trolls, or both.

Hello all,

I have just tested emIDE and find it very useful and easy to use for a free IDE including fitting toolchain.

However I heard that the KEIL compiler produces more efficient code than the GCC. Is there a way to use emIDE together with the KEIL compiler?

Is there a way to use emIDE together with the KEIL compiler?

why?!

However I heard that the KEIL compiler produces more efficient code than the GCC. Is there a way to use emIDE together with the KEIL compiler?

Is there something specific emIDE / CodeBlocks can do that uVision can't?

I am currently evaluating options and personally I prefer free software. However for testing it would make my life easier to keep the IDE and only change the compiler.

Another side effect would be the possibility to use some more projects instead of just KEIL projects. If the KEIL compiler really produces better code this may result in emIDE projects being built with the possible better KEIL compiler.

Another side effect would be the possibility to use some more projects instead of just KEIL projects.

many downloaded 'projects' (note the quotes) will only directly compile when using the same compiler as the 'developer' (again note the quotes). There is more crap on the web than good code

Whichever compiler you use you will need to port if the project was not developed with the same toolset as you

I am totylly aware that there might (and will) be parts that will have to be ported to fit. However this is not giving me a headache as it never was different with free solutions and in the past the open source community almost everytime solved such problems perfectly.

For a good solutions the time invested might be worth it. Besides that I believe porting between different toolchains is not that much of a problem making it even worthier to be able to use the same IDE with different compilers.

If you would like to import uVision projects or to use the realview compiler from ARM, use emblocks. You can drag-and-drop your uv projects into it.

One reason to use emblocks instead of uVision for arm compiler is, it's much faster in building (and really much faster).

It is also richer with debug features (like "set PC at current line").

This is in fact a major advantage of both emBlocks and emIDE (as descendants of Code::Blocks):
They both inherit multi-threaded build, which basically means that your
build speed scales with the number of CPU cores.

4 cores: 4 times the speed, so 5 seconds instead of 20.
This can be quite significant on larger builds.
I would expect a commercial tool chain such as Keil or IAR to be
at least as good as a free one, so Keil should work on this.

I still prefer emIDE, it is easier to use. Very easy to create
a project and supports any ARM device. Works 100%bout of the box.
However, both are nice.

Both are nice but emblocks debugger is much more sophisticated and it is coming with a lot of plugins (doxygen, spelling etc). emblocks has the uVision look and feel but much faster, even the memory window is equal to uVision (with the scrolling address window at the sidebar)

Pro's emblocks

- set the $pc at cursor line (useful for algorithm debugging)
- editor highlight of assembler files
- debugger has visual feedback in assembler files
- disassembly window is much better readable (highlight of arm-code and grayed source code)
- memory window can show characters/integers, signed and unsigned
- register window has fully explainable flags (like uVision)
- peripheral view can also change values (and color syntax of the type of register)
- auto update of memory view at every step with color syntax on changed values
- stlink is working out-of-the-box (not Jlink only)

Pro's emIde

- debugger setup is easier because it has only Jlink support.

I love the hover on variables in the EmBlocks debugger to see the current values. I hardly use watches any more.

If you really compare both by using them then there is a big difference. All the mentioned upcoming features for emIDE are already in EmBlocks (not accidentally i think). You should really try them both side-by-side. It's not because both use GCC and both uses a codeblocks source that it's equal nice.