FPC for AVR

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

FPC for AVR

Mark Morgan Lloyd-5
What sort of targets are people looking at, what sort of debugging is
available, and has anybody experimented with the "AVR Dragon"?

--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FPC for AVR

Christo Crause


On 04 Jun 2017 8:29 PM, "Mark Morgan Lloyd" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> What sort of targets are people looking at, what sort of debugging is available, and has anybody experimented with the "AVR Dragon"?

As a hobbyist I've built some simple projects with arduino and then standalone mega and tiny range controllers using avr-gcc. Don't have hardware debugger.

I have recently started avr programming on fpc-pascal. The trunk compiler is already quite good. One problem is obviously lack of libraries to interface with peripherals such as LCD, serial, SD cards etc.


_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FPC for AVR

Brian
In reply to this post by Mark Morgan Lloyd-5
mikroPascal (not free) supports AVR and many other chips.

https://shop.mikroe.com/compilers/mikropascal/avr-electronic-license

Brian
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FPC for AVR

Mark Morgan Lloyd-5
On 14/06/17 20:15, Brian wrote:
> mikroPascal (not free) supports AVR and many other chips.
> https://shop.mikroe.com/compilers/mikropascal/avr-electronic-license
> Brian

Yes, but I was asking about the FPC situation. I'm desperately resisting
local pressure to write code that might end up non-trivial in C/C++.

--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FPC for AVR

Rainer Stratmann
Am Donnerstag, 15. Juni 2017, 08:34:49 schrieb Mark Morgan Lloyd:
> On 14/06/17 20:15, Brian wrote:
> > mikroPascal (not free) supports AVR and many other chips.
> > https://shop.mikroe.com/compilers/mikropascal/avr-electronic-license
> > Brian
>
> Yes, but I was asking about the FPC situation. I'm desperately resisting
> local pressure to write code that might end up non-trivial in C/C++.

As far as I know there is not ab FPC solution by now.

I have Mikropascal for AVR and it works good.
All the projects I do with with it.

They also have an ARM Pascal compiler which works fine.

4k Byte code for AVR and 8k Byte code for ARM is free.
You can download it for free. I have a USB dongle Version here.

>
> --
> Mark Morgan Lloyd
> markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk
>
> [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
> _______________________________________________
> fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
> http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FPC for AVR

Mark Morgan Lloyd-5
On 15/06/17 11:15, Rainer Stratmann wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 15. Juni 2017, 08:34:49 schrieb Mark Morgan Lloyd:> On 14/06/17 20:15, Brian wrote:> > mikroPascal (not free) supports AVR and many other chips.> > https://shop.mikroe.com/compilers/mikropascal/avr-electronic-license> > Brian> > Yes, but I was asking about the FPC situation. I'm desperately resisting> local pressure to write code that might end up non-trivial in C/C++.
> As far as I know there is not ab FPC solution by now.

http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/AVR

http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/AVR_Programming
--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FPC for AVR

Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR)
In reply to this post by Mark Morgan Lloyd-5
Hi,

On Thu, 15 Jun 2017, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:

> > mikroPascal (not free) supports AVR and many other chips.
> > https://shop.mikroe.com/compilers/mikropascal/avr-electronic-license
> > Brian
>
> Yes, but I was asking about the FPC situation. I'm desperately resisting
> local pressure to write code that might end up non-trivial in C/C++.

Well, FPC is an open source project, which means without community
feedback and contribution, it won't improve, or would, but much slower. :)

So if you have time, how about you try if it works for your
usecase/platform/etc, and at least give feedback on it? Even if it didn't
work, if you run into issues you're unable to solve, and share them, it
might be helpful for the developers. And I'm sure some of the issues you'd
encounter could be fixed overnight, if the devs would know it's a blocker
for someone's actual usecase.

Especially with a project as young and specialized as FPC's AVR backend.

Charlie
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FPC for AVR

Mark Morgan Lloyd-5
On 15/06/17 11:30, Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR) wrote:
> Hi,
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2017, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
>>> mikroPascal (not free) supports AVR and many other chips.> > https://shop.mikroe.com/compilers/mikropascal/avr-electronic-license> > Brian>> Yes, but I was asking about the FPC situation. I'm desperately resisting> local pressure to write code that might end up non-trivial in C/C++.
> Well, FPC is an open source project, which means without communityfeedback and contribution, it won't improve, or would, but much slower. :)
> So if you have time, how about you try if it works for yourusecase/platform/etc, and at least give feedback on it? Even if it didn'twork, if you run into issues you're unable to solve, and share them, itmight be helpful for the developers. And I'm sure some of the issues you'dencounter could be fixed overnight, if the devs would know it's a blockerfor someone's actual usecase.

At the risk of making myself unpopular: because right now I /don't/ have
time. And part of the reason that my colleagues and I are seriously
short of time is that we've put far too much of it over the years into
trying to work around problems in various open source projects on
various architectures, starting off with Debian on SPARC and heading off
in even more arcane directions.

And that /does/ include FPC.

> Especially with a project as young and specialized as FPC's AVR backend.

"Young and specialised"... exactly. Which is why I was interested in any
light that people currently working on AVR could throw on it, since
what's in the Wiki is roughly 9 months old (apart from recently-added
links etc.) and that's a long time for something which people are
actively working on.

--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FPC for AVR

Florian Klaempfl
Am 15.06.2017 um 14:10 schrieb Mark Morgan Lloyd:

> On 15/06/17 11:30, Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR) wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On Thu, 15 Jun 2017, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
>>>> mikroPascal (not free) supports AVR and many other chips.> >
>>>> https://shop.mikroe.com/compilers/mikropascal/avr-electronic-license> > Brian>> Yes, but I was
>>>> asking about the FPC situation. I'm desperately resisting> local pressure to write code that
>>>> might end up non-trivial in C/C++.
>> Well, FPC is an open source project, which means without communityfeedback and contribution, it
>> won't improve, or would, but much slower. :)
>> So if you have time, how about you try if it works for yourusecase/platform/etc, and at least give
>> feedback on it? Even if it didn'twork, if you run into issues you're unable to solve, and share
>> them, itmight be helpful for the developers. And I'm sure some of the issues you'dencounter could
>> be fixed overnight, if the devs would know it's a blockerfor someone's actual usecase.
>
> At the risk of making myself unpopular: because right now I /don't/ have time.

I risk the same: mail less, code more :>
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FPC for AVR

Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR)
In reply to this post by Mark Morgan Lloyd-5
Hi,

On Thu, 15 Jun 2017, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:

> At the risk of making myself unpopular: because right now I /don't/ have
> time.

Sorry, I didn't mean this personal to you. I was just a bit triggered on
the fact that people offer competing products on FPC status requests,
because I've seen it more than once that people just ask for the Status of
X, regarding FPC, and when it's not there right now, they just move on to
something else. And we have to "compete" with a whole range of commercial
products, where this attitude doesn't help.

> > Especially with a project as young and specialized as FPC's AVR backend.
>
> "Young and specialised"... exactly. Which is why I was interested in any
> light that people currently working on AVR could throw on it, since
> what's in the Wiki is roughly 9 months old (apart from recently-added
> links etc.) and that's a long time for something which people are
> actively working on.

You are right, of course.

Charlie
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FPC for AVR

Mark Morgan Lloyd-5
On 15/06/17 16:45, Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR) wrote:
> Hi,
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2017, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
>> At the risk of making myself unpopular: because right now I /don't/ have> time.
> Sorry, I didn't mean this personal to you. I was just a bit triggered onthe fact that people offer competing products on FPC status requests,because I've seen it more than once that people just ask for the Status ofX, regarding FPC, and when it's not there right now, they just move on tosomething else. And we have to "compete" with a whole range of commercialproducts, where this attitude doesn't help.

I agree for what it's worth, and I also find it very frustrating when-
in a mailing list specifically for FPC or Lazarus- somebody asks a
question about the standard development environment or a standard
component and gets the answer that the best way to do it is to use
somebody else's pet project.

>>> Especially with a project as young and specialized as FPC's AVR backend.>> "Young and specialised"... exactly. Which is why I was interested in any> light that people currently working on AVR could throw on it, since> what's in the Wiki is roughly 9 months old (apart from recently-added> links etc.) and that's a long time for something which people are> actively working on.
> You are right, of course.

I'm only using Arduinos at the moment (potentially including e.g.
Teensy), and until I'm far more knowledgeable about remote debugging
etc. am inclined to keep it that way :-)

--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FPC for AVR

Mark Morgan Lloyd-5
In reply to this post by Mark Morgan Lloyd-5
On 15/06/17 17:45, Bernd Mueller wrote:

> On 06/15/2017 10:34 AM, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
>
>> Yes, but I was asking about the FPC situation. I'm desperately
>> resisting local pressure to write code that might end up non-trivial
>> in C/C++.
>
> I realized a project with an ATTiny1634. Nothing special: I used both
> UARTs (interrupt driven), had to handle a small shaft encoder and had to
> do a little bit banging on the GPIOs. All together, I used 6 Interrupts.
> For debugging, I implemented a third "soft-UART", which could send only.
>
> At any time, I could switch back to the pascal compiler, which I used
> over the last 17 years for AVR. But I am not going back, too much
> advantages on the fpc side to me :-)

Thanks for that, encouraging.

--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal