This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

uv3 -b without all the windows

This has been discussed before, but not recently....

Has there been any progess in making uv3 not open all its windows when using the -b command line option?

It is rather annoying when all you want to do is compile from within emacs and it insists on waisting all that time opening 10s if windows for no reason at all....

Parents
  • "Thus anyone that has not developed without the IDE will be happy with it."

    Not necessarily.

    I have developed without IDEs, and with IDEs.

    Currently, I use the Keil IDE.
    Yes, it has limitations - and I frequently use other editors (particularly CodeWright) in favour of the built-in one (I have created an item on the uVIsion 'Tools' menu to do it). But I find that the advantages outweigh the limitations.

    "BTW the main reason I do not use the IDE is not any of the above, it is because it is incable of developing multiple flavors..."

    I agree that this is a particular weak point in uVision (i've commented on it here before).
    Currently, it's not a big deal for me - so I stick with uVision.
    But if I needed to do loadsa variants as you do, I think that probably would preclude uVision... :-(

    PS

    Have you looked at Eclipse: http://eclipse.org/

    Perhaps if Keil et al just concentrated on making their tools Eclipse-compatible, they could all stop re-inventing their own IDE wheel...?

Reply
  • "Thus anyone that has not developed without the IDE will be happy with it."

    Not necessarily.

    I have developed without IDEs, and with IDEs.

    Currently, I use the Keil IDE.
    Yes, it has limitations - and I frequently use other editors (particularly CodeWright) in favour of the built-in one (I have created an item on the uVIsion 'Tools' menu to do it). But I find that the advantages outweigh the limitations.

    "BTW the main reason I do not use the IDE is not any of the above, it is because it is incable of developing multiple flavors..."

    I agree that this is a particular weak point in uVision (i've commented on it here before).
    Currently, it's not a big deal for me - so I stick with uVision.
    But if I needed to do loadsa variants as you do, I think that probably would preclude uVision... :-(

    PS

    Have you looked at Eclipse: http://eclipse.org/

    Perhaps if Keil et al just concentrated on making their tools Eclipse-compatible, they could all stop re-inventing their own IDE wheel...?

Children
  • Perhaps if Keil et al just concentrated on making their tools Eclipse-compatible, they could all stop re-inventing their own IDE wheel...?
    Not only their own IDE wheel, but how much effort have they wasted on making an inferior editor.

    Oh, if the toolmakers could agree on a common interface

    * Keil et al could free up resources to make the compilers even better
    * CodeWrights succesor et al could free up resources to make the editors even better
    * Eclispe et al could free up resources to make the IDE even better
    * SILabs et al could free up resources to make the debugger even better
    * the developers could have the same look and feel when cnanging platform

    Erik

    PS any rumors as to where the CodeWright developers went after Borland (those bastards) killed CodeWright.

  • "PS any rumors as to where the CodeWright developers went after Borland (those bastards) killed CodeWright."

    Presumably, Borland intended that they'd stay with Borland and put their skills to work on other Borland products - just like a certain well-known FPGA manufacturer did recently when they bought another company and immediately canned their product entire line...

  • Presumably, Borland intended
    Just like Borland intended when they killed "Brief", those guys escaped and made CodeWright and now got "caught" again. My guess is that once you have escaped, you will do it again.

    Erik