gnupic: Re: [gnupic] terminal simulation on gpsim?
Subject:
Re: [gnupic] terminal simulation on gpsim?
From:
Scott Dattalo ####@####.####
Date:
10 Mar 2006 18:53:40 +0000
Message-Id: <4411CB2B.6040002@dattalo.com>
Borut Razem wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
>> The usart_con module slipped by without me noticing! Why did you add a
>> whole new module instead of adding a way for the existing one to
>> direct its output to a console?
>
>
> The background is that I was going to add the sdcc pic16 port to the
> regression test suite, so I needed a way to display characters from the
> compiled and simulated C code (putchar()) to the standard output
> (console). The gpsim usart module was already there, but:
<snip>
> Yes, you are right: all of quoted reasons (or excuses ;-) can be solved,
> but I needed a quick solution and I did it in a dirty way :-(
I understand all of those reasons and probably would've done something
similar given the same circumstances and goals.
> If / when all the previusly listed issues will be implemented in usart,
> usart_con won't be needed any more and can be removed.
I think it'd be possible to use the same gui-based usart console for
non-gui applications. The module already examines whether or not the gui
is being used and will selectively inhibit gui calls. In fact, in the
gpsim regression tests (which run in non-gui mode) already takes
advantage of this feature for the usart_test/ regression test. I think a
simple change would be to direct the module's output to stdout if it's
determine the gui is not being used.
>
> P.S.: sdcc pic16 regression test are working quite well. Currently there
> are many failures, but I think they will be quickly solved by pic16 sdcc
> gurus. The results can be found at:
> http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/release_wiki/index.php?page=RegTestRes
> Usualy is more difficult to find a bug then to fix it, but now we have a
> tool :-)
I saw this and was quite impressed! Fixing bugs is easy. Finding them is
harder. Designing tests and tools to find them is harder still!
> Thank you for the gpsim and sorry for my negligence,
? I don't see any negligence here. But I have seen your contributions to
gpsim and sdcc, and they've been enormous and very professional!
Scott
