How do I go about picking an architecture ? My first thoughts suggested Cortex M3 but the more I look into it the less sure I am.
Obviously I don't to go to the trouble of learning a new technology only to find that I've made a bad processor choice (ie nearly end of line). I've spent many hours looking at many websites and have yet to find any high-level stuff on choosing my first ARM device.
If there's one thing wrong with ARM its the almost infinite number of devices
I'm an embedded developer wanting to undertake my first ARM project, so I'm completely new to the ARM architecture. I want a low power device with serial, USB and some ADC channels.
"most commercial TCP/IP stacks."
and you can eat BigMac with BK seasoning too, :).
while entertaining, your argument does sound irrelevant to our discussion here.
I did not find Andy's argument entertaining one bit (in the case). He is simply right.
I meant of course, "I did not find Andy's argument entertaining one bit (in this case). He is simply right."
tamir, have you managed to find Per's writing that suggests that his caution against the use of OEM libraries "is due to the impact such libraries can have on the performance, stability and in the end, SAFETY of systems. "?
Just don't want to put words in Per's mouth, you know.
I already explained to you where, and even provided a quote.
tamir, are you talking about this "quote"
"For commercial use, you should have full access to the source code..."
which part of that talked about "performance, stability and in the end SAFETY"?
are you suggesting that having, or not having, access to the source code will hurt "the performance, stability and in the end, SAFETY of systems".
if so, how?
if not, what exactly did you mean?
try to focus on the end of the quote. namely, the expression that start with a "s" (a blatant clue, surely you agree). if you need more, just say so. Ahh, whatever, I'll give you one more: the next character is "o". now it's a no-brainer.
tamir, thanks for that clue, not.
if you cannot answer the questions, please just admit to it and we will excuse you on your behalf.
thanks in advance.
I never like this, but it is a software release date and a reason to celebrate to let get it on!
I meant: "I'm never like this, but it is a software release date and a reason to celebrate to let get it on!"
Mr Tamir.
What are you on { about } ?
release P004 rocks...!
Per did use the word, "dangerous".
But I don't think he was talking (particularly) about hazards to persons or property - I think he was talking about business risks.
As in, "there is a danger [business risk] that not having the source code may leave your project/product high & dry"
I think.
"I think he was talking about business risks."
nice try. I would give you an F for effort.
tamir, don't give up. don't EVER give up, :).
so Andy, you are conceeding on that the two other fronts (performance and stability), Per didn't think using OEM libraries would have adverse effect? could you work that out with tamir? :)
"As in, "there is a danger [business risk] that not having the source code may leave your project/product high & dry""
so it would not have any adverse impact on "SAFETY" (aka business risk) if you have access to the source code?
does that make it OK to use the Luminary libraries? could you please work that out with Per? :)