Peter Townson,
I understand that routines for adc, i2c and serial communications etc are
individual micro-processors. My work is 100% with Microchip, but I worked
few months for Freescale Semiconductors. I also agree that documentation for
these routines shouldn’t be part of the documentation of the compiler.
I developed an open source project here in Brazil, this project is based on
the project Gogo Board. The Gogo Board framework is a collection of
open-source hardware platforms mainly aimed for educational projects. Its
uses a microchip micro-processor. I would like very much to use sdcc, but
the compiler I currently use has an extensive library. I just can’t tell to
my boss that we should use sdcc and that all routines must be rewritten from
scratch, just to be 100% open source. I would be very happy with this
freedom , but I will waste so much time just to get where I'm now. The
master Google will help me, but he won't make my task for me , yet :P .
Why the sdcc don’t have a model of implementation for the libraries. For
example, i2c library has methods for writing, reading, waiting etc. Thus
each micro-processor has its own implementation, and the user can work in a
higher level. If I want to that my routines be added in the library must
follow the standard model of implementation.
This is what I really want.
The bests regards.
--
Lucas A. Tanure Alves
Student of Computer Science - Unicamp - Brazil
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA
-OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise
-Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation
-Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD
http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H
_______________________________________________
Sdcc-user mailing list
Sdcc-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sdcc-user
