[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] AVR Gcc with AVR Tiny

From: Bruce D. Lightner
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] AVR Gcc with AVR Tiny
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 12:01:08 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317)

Joerg Wunsch wrote:
As Royce Pereira wrote:

I wish there were a better way to use program ATtiny12 etc than
keeping 2 copies AVR-GCC. Also Bruce's method is stuck with gcc
2.95. I'd like a command line option or the -mcu option to do the

I don't think Bruce's method is limited to GCC 2.95, it's only that
this appears to be the compiler he likes best.

WARNING! [flame on] :-)

Joerg, as usual, you've got it "half right". As David Brown has discovered, not surprisingly, something other than avr-gcc 2.95 *will* work for RAM-less AVR parts, like the ATtiny12 and the ATtiny15L.

But, you are wrong when you suggest that avr-gcc 2.95 is the compiler I like "best". I use avr-gcc 2.95 on older projects because I *have to*. And *that* is because of the gratuitous changes to "avr-gcc" that *you* have made, seemingly in the name of "C-code cultural purity".

What I'm taking about is the rapid "deprecation", and then outright elimination of the low-level "avr-gcc" I/O constructs like sbi(), cbi(), in(), out(), etc. As a result, people like me are stuck with avr-gcc 2.95 on older projects. That, or we've got to go in an make an amazing number of manual "tweaks" to working, field-tested firmware. In the "real world", that means firmware bugs, wasted effort, lost dollars, and/or unsatisfied customers.

Why the hell do you folks remove that stuff!? (Don't answer that...it is a rhetorical question! I've heard your "excuses" here, and they "just don't wash!")

It is unfortunate that "hobbyists" like you, the "B-Team" gatekeepers for "avr-gcc", don't "get it" when it comes to the *real* users of open source tools like GCC. [Boy, that was *harsh*, wasn't it!] Upward compatibility is key, but clearly *you* and your cronies that decide what goes into (and "comes" out of) "avr-gcc" don't even understand the concept. To no small measure, companies like Microsoft are where they are today because *they* understand why *upward compatibility* is key to running a business efficiently. [I'm biting my tongue because I just said something nice about Microshaft!]

Don't get me wrong! I'm not suggesting that you folks don't deserve boundless praise for all the hard work you have put into "avr-gcc". It is a truly amazing product! However, your "clique" clearly lacks some basic "common sense" where it comes to product planning and upgrades!

[flame off] :-)

Feel free to "flame away"... I'll give you (all) the courtesy of *not* flaming you back! :-)

Best regards,


 Bruce D. Lightner
 Lightner Engineering
 La Jolla, California
 Voice: +1-858-551-4011
 FAX: +1-858-551-0777
 Email: address@hidden
 URL: http://www.lightner.net/lightner/bruce/

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]