[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc?
From: |
Markus Hitter |
Subject: |
Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc? |
Date: |
Sun, 02 Nov 2014 12:15:59 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 |
Thanks for chiming in, Dave.
Am 02.11.2014 um 05:25 schrieb Dave Hylands:
> There is https://github.com/mbedmicro/mbed for the offline version of mbed.
I'm aware of this, but besides having pretty ineffective code, as described,
it's also not really suitable to be used with makefiles. I've uploaded a Hello
World over UART sample here:
https://github.com/Traumflug/Teacup_Firmware/tree/gen7-arm/retarget-sample-code
Looking at the Makefile there, it needs quite a few tricks to make something
usable, a long list of -I flags, -D flags and also creating wrapper code files,
see %.c target. It can be done, of course, but it's not pretty.
> I think its important to distinguish the functionality that is part of
> avr-libc, which is just the C-runtime and as far a I'm aware doesn't
> include functionality liike UART.
At least it defines pin and register names. Linker scripts are handled
transparently to the user. No -I flags neccessary, no mandatory -D flags. And
it builds a linkable library, which mbed doesn't.
I brought up a similar request on the gcc-arm-none-eabi Launchpad project and
their opinion is, there exist too many flavours of chips using ARM technology
to organize them well. Can't really agree with this. If core developers can't
sort this stuff, how would a casual or new developer do that?
gcc-arm-none-eabi comes even with a stdio implementation. What I have in mind
isn't reinventing the wheel, more something like fetching, reorganizing and
completing existing stuff in a fashion suitable for Makefile based development.
Or cmake, if you prefer that.
Markus
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dipl. Ing. (FH) Markus Hitter
http://www.jump-ing.de/
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc?, (continued)
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc?, Scott L. Price, 2014/11/02
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc?, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj, 2014/11/02
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc?, Markus Hitter, 2014/11/03
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc?, Szikra István, 2014/11/07
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc?, Erik Walthinsen, 2014/11/07
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc?, Markus Hitter, 2014/11/08
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc?, Bob Paddock, 2014/11/10
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc?, Markus Hitter, 2014/11/10
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc?, Bob Paddock, 2014/11/11
- Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc?, Markus Hitter, 2014/11/11
Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is there interest in an arm-libc?,
Markus Hitter <=