|
I used multiple telnet sessions and vi and built my code on the box. Sounds crude, but it was effective for the following reasons: 1) It eliminated cross compiler configuration and errors, which turned out to be a major problem 2) It required no new learning curve. Even Netbeans has some quirks especially when used as a build vehicle 3) The on-board libraries were more reliable and better documented than the cross compile, and the Cavium seemed able to supply the required horsepower From: Jim Ham <> To: Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 11:10 AM Subject: Re: [ts-7000] Re: IDEs Microchip has just adopted Netbeans. It's pretty simple and works for
their PIC projects. Its very approachable where one can use it lightly and then use more features as one learns more about it. Myself I prefer Emacs, a make file and several open command line windows. This gives me complete control and the ultimate flexibility. You could do a lot worse than providing a makefile template and a video demonstrating a typical command-line development environment. This could include a man file in one window, less with an open file in another, Emacs in another, the results of a grep in another, etc. Sometimes one can even compile and debug in the development environment, saving cross-compiling until later. In this case there might even be a ddd window open with gdb and the new application (trying) to run in the background. This works best in a Unix-like environment of course. You can substitute your own favorite editor for the Emacs references above. Just the opinion of an old curmudgeon. At the same time it would be interesting to know how many others prefer a command-line development environment. Jim Ham > --- In , Mark Featherston<> wrote: >> >> As many of you know we currently provide the Eclipse IDE configured with >> our toolchains for the various boards. We're looking to improve how >> this is supported and to update the IDE package for our newer boards but >> we are also exploring other IDEs as an alternative. I've talked to a >> number of customers who seem to strongly prefer Code::Blocks or >> Netbeans. I'm curious to hear opinions from those who have worked with >> these or other relevant IDEs themselves. >> >> Here are the various IDE's I've been evaluating: >> >> *Code::Blocks*: http://www.codeblocks.org/ >> *Netbeans*: http://netbeans.org/ >> *Codelite*: http://www.codelite.org/ >> *Eclipse*: http://www.eclipse.org/ >> >> If anyone else has any open cross platform IDEs to recommend we'd >> certainly be interested in those as well. I'm currently leaning towards >> Code::Blocks as it seems like it would lend itself to the simplest >> configuration while still supporting the most features. They also seem >> to have a community around using the IDE with embedded systems. However >> if most of you prefer Eclipse there are a few improvements we can add to >> this package to make usage easier. Specifically I'd like to add >> templates for our boards rather than just sample the projects that show >> how to use the cross compilers. >> >> -- >> Best Regards, >> __________________________________________________________ >> Mark Featherston, Technologic Systems | voice: (480) 837-5200 >> 16525 East Laser Drive | fax: (480) 837-5300 >> Fountain Hills, AZ 85268 | web: www.embeddedARM.com >> > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2012.0.1834 / Virus Database: 2092/4590 - Release Date: 11/01/11 > > -- Porcine Associates LLC 244 O'Connor St. Menlo Park, CA 94025 USA +1(650)326-2669 fax +1(650)326-1071 __._,_.___
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: =Email Delivery: Digest | m("yahoogroups.com?subject","ts-7000-fullfeatured");=Change Delivery Format: Fully Featured">Switch to Fully Featured Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | =Unsubscribe __,_._,___ |