On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Øyvind Harboe <oyvind.har...@zylin.com> wrote: > I tinkered a bit with Microchip 32 bit MIPS CPUs, but although Microchip > rely on GCC, I didn't get a sense of enthusiasm for developers going > off and using anything but Microchip tools...
That is right, especially when PIC32 support in OpenOCD is not that great yet. ;-) Eg: http://www.microchip.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=482128 PIC32 does have better gcc support. http://www.microchipopen.com/wiki/index.php?title=Help:Building_ccompiler4pic32_under_Linux But the official PIC32 GCC compiler comes with proprietory C libraries from Microchip (together with MIPS). Personally I think Microchip is wrong to choose the MIPS core. If they choose to use Cortex M3 core, with their good customer support and better delivery commitment (compared to TI, Atmel, NXP, etc), they would have win more customers. I am a big fan of Microchip due to their good support and I used quite a lot of PICs in last job. But then we choose ST Cortex M3 at work in current job due to the fact we think Cortex M3 should be the way to go. We use basically all ARM core here in the team (ARM7, ARM9 and Cortex M3) for new designs. > They could (gasp!) write code that could build & run on *any* CPU next, > especially if they use some minimall OS w/standard peripheral abstraction! :-) -- Xiaofan http://mcuee.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
