gnupic: Re: [gnupic] Is sdcc + gputils + gpsim useful ?
Subject:
RE: [gnupic] Is sdcc + gputils + gpsim useful ?
From:
Chen Xiao Fan ####@####.####
Date:
29 Jul 2005 01:47:31 +0100
Message-Id: <3B8AEFFADD3DD4118F8100508BACEC2C07F773DD@spex>
Some suggestion to make SGG (sdcc+gputils+gpsim) more useful.
1) Cosmetics change to gputils: to boost the version number. It is
quite stable now. New user will feel uneasy with 0.13.2. IMHO,
it is worthy putting 0.8.8 there or better 8.8.8 to attract more
users. :) Just kidding.
2) To make gpsim more useful, one thing is to make the sample programs
right. For example the sample programs for PIC16 are written for
PIC18C242 and gpsim 0.21.8 (latest snapshot) says that 18c242 is not a
valid processor. Please refer to the attached sample session.
3) To make sdcc more useful, maybe some more sample programs are
necessary and we shall wait for Peter's updated Howto. :)
Some direction to add inline assembly or linking with assembly
codes (or library) will be very valuable to the users.
It seems to me that sdcc is rapidly progressing judging from the
CVS changelog. Therefore it may well be quite usable.
Regards,
Xiaofan
>gpsim -s bt18.cod
gpsim - the GNUPIC simulator
version: 0.21.8
type help for help
starting server....
(gpsim.exe:3892): GLib-WARNING **: g_io_win32_set_flags () not implemented.
(gpsim.exe:3892): GLib-WARNING **: g_io_win32_set_flags () not implemented.
started server
gpsim> SimulationMode:52
18c242 is not a valid processor.
(try 'processor list' to see a list of valid processors.
18c242 is not a valid processor.
(try 'processor list' to see a list of valid processors.
unrecognized processor in the program file
gpsim>
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Onion ####@####.####
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 6:13 AM
...
So, do you think it is worth trying to sort out some way of making sdcc
+ gputils + gpsim EVEN MORE useful ? ;-)
Peter
