I'm looking for a verilog simulator for windows. All I see is the source code for veriwell, with makefiles for Linux. Anybody have any suggestion on where I can find the binaries for veriwell or other Verilog simulator.
Veriwell is an excellent simulator, but unfortunately only supports vlog-95, which makes it unusable for realistic designs. Icarus is the way to go - I'm pretty sure you can download Windows binaries, very reliable and stable, active support, good language compliance, very low level of bugs (much better than at least one widely-used commercial simulator, for example).
Related
I need to learn to program MSP430, but don't have the actual chip yet. All configurations that I've tried at Code Composer Studio (except Snapshot, but it does not count, right?) require something on my USB. How do I learn to program the chip without the chip?
And what is an emulator that requires a USB?
Online emulator (used chrome): http://www.msp430emulator.com
This MSP430 Emulator is open source, and can be used directly online without downloading anything. Still under construction but has a good debug interface. Unfortunately no integration with CCS.
It is on the TI Open source page: TI Open Source Project Page
"The MSP430 Online Emulator provides a complete software model of the MSP430 16-bit instruction set. It is an interactive debugger for advanced development and in depth firmware/hardware analysis. Peripherals include UART, GPIO Ports, BCM+, Timer_A, and more! Open source, and absolutely free - access to the TI MSP430 Launchpad allows you to effectively build and debug firmware. No hardware setup, emulate anytime anywhere!"
open source on github:
https://github.com/RudolfGeosits/MSP430-Emulator
If you need something implemented you can add to the code yourself and run a local emulation server for real time applications.
This emulator is pretty awesome, once you can get it running. Note that it does claim GDB support, which likely means you can get a pure eclipse CDT C project & CDT-GDB-HW-Debugging session up and running against it (making sure to compile with the msp430's tool chain, of course).
http://opencores.org/project,openmsp430
As far as a simulator, the answer is truly 'no'. I would like to be wrong on that... But consider for a moment the number of variants of the msp430, the peripherals, and so on. Not sure if any company can justify that kind of cost!
Especially when launchpad/etc are so cheap and fast.
If you can afford £10 then the launchpad is the way to go just to teach yourself about the MSP430. You can use either IAR Embedded Workbench or Code Composer Studio, both which come in code size limited version which will be plenty big enough to learn with. I don't like either, but of the two the IAR one is, IMHO, the better bet as it's not Eclipse based. If you don't mind Java and Eclipse, then CCS is a viable option for you. One huge advantage with CCS is it runs on Linux, but really, it's still not a patch on Rowley Crossworks which runs on Linux. The latter has a cheap educational licence.
As far as the emulator and USB question is concerned, it's maybe being slightly pedantic, but it's not an emulator, it's a debug interface. There is a debugger built into the chip that enables you to load the code into the chip, set breakpoints, single step through code.
This kit is a great way to start because the debugger interface is built into the kit, you can access pins on the processor, see LEDs come on and all that good stuff that gives you the warm feeling you're programming a chip properly. For the sake of £10 you'd be mad not to!
I have a friend who is was a serious Linux developer but now he's working with C# on Windows and is really loving it. I'm attracted to C# because, like Java, I should be able to compile on one system and run anywhere.
If you are developing on Windows with C#, you're using dot-Net. On Linux and MacOS, you're using Mono.
Other people have posted that Mono is pretty good, no longer a science project, and that most of the core Microsoft functionality is present. But that's not really getting at the questions that I have. I'm wondering:
How does performance of Mono on Linux/MacOS rate against Java? If I want to run fast on all three platforms with the same object code, what's my best choice?
Is it easy/possible/reasonable to use Mono with makefiles and do my development with emacs?
Is there support for code factoring in MacOS and Linux, or am I better off just biting the bullet and doing all of my development in Windows?
How well does Mono work with Subversion and the rest of the open source development stack? How about autoconf? Or is this a completely different way of doing things?
Thanks
I have been using Mono on Linux for about three years and lately have been using it on OS X. Some of the Linux stuff was pretty extensive but the OS X stuff has just been some simple ASP.NET MVC2 apps so far.
1) Performance of Mono has never been an issue for me. That is not to say that performance has not been important, it is just that the performance of Mono itself has never been an issue. A lot of what I have done is web based so I/O and database memory use have hit me before Mono has.
Historically, the biggest deficiency with Mono has been the Garbage Collector (GC). I would say that Java is better tuned in this regard. The most recent versions of Mono have made huge strides in this area but I do not have any hard numbers for you in terms of comparisons.
I am sure Mono is faster sometimes and Java sometimes but I would say that Java is faster overall.
2) You can certainly do Mono development with makefiles. Certainly the Mono team itself does. Also you can certainly use Emacs and there is a C# mode for it.
I tend to use MonoDevelop and xbuild (Mono version of msbuild) myself and do not have any experience doing C# work in Emacs. MonoDevelop is great because it is exactly the same on all platforms. Also, although I rarely use it anymore, it is nice that the project format is the same as Visual Studio and SharpDevelop.
3) MonoDevelop has pretty decent code factoring support. It is the same on Windows, Linux, and Mac. You do not need to use Windows for development (though you certainly can) but I believe you will be happier using an IDE like MonoDevelop. Even things like Intellisense become hard to live without once you are used to them. But integrated debugging, being able to drill-down into the framework, database integration, unit testing, SCM integration, and other nice tooling support all in one place is just the way to go (for me at least).
4) Mono itself does not care about version control of course. Your source files are just text and you could use anything to manage them.
That said, MonoDevelop has fantastic Subversion support built right into the IDE. I have used it extensively and it is one of the reasons I have trouble moving off MonoDevelop even on Windows. The latest version of MonoDevelop (2.6 beta) includes Git support as well.
You did not mention unit testing but MonoDevelop also has NUnit support built into the IDE. I use that on every project as well and it works excellently. The version in MonoDevelop is 2.4.8 (if memory serves) so it is not quite current but it works great.
In a nutshell, Mono works really well with Open Source tooling in general. It has always played really well for me.
Autoconf is of course used by the Mono project itself but, as a Mono developer, I have never seen a need for it. I strive to only use managed code in my projects. As such, all I need on the target platform is Mono (or .NET). Not having to worry about all that stuff is one of the primary benefits of a managed environment like Mono or Java. The runtime itself (the CLR) ensures that my app has everything it needs to function properly.
I know that MonoDevelop will build autoconf/autorun files for C/C++ projects (non-Mono) but I have not done much with it myself.
As to a previous comment, the Mono JIT is obviously tuned to the target platform. That is where platform specific performance tuning happens.
Just as a comment, I find that Mono is best viewed as a development environment in it's own right rather than a compatibility layer for Microsoft stuff. The Mono team has extended .NET in many interesting ways. Anything you develop for Mono will run on .NET but there are some .NET features not available for Mono. For example, Mono does not support Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF). You have to use Windows Forms or GTK# for cross-platform GUI work. You can also use something like Cocoa# or MonoMac on the Mac, MonoTouch on iPhone, or MonoDroid for Android. You can use Moonlight instead of Silverlight as well although I have not played with it much.
One more thing since you asked about Java. I have found a few times that the Java world had libraries that I could not find equivalents for in the .NET world. In these cases, I have had amazing luck using IKVM.NET to integrate this into my Mono apps. IKVM.NET also works on .NET but Mono and IKVM.NET are very cozy and even share some code.
So there you go, one real answer for you at least.
I'm evaluating components for a new embedded platform. CPU is an ARM9 and OS is Linux. Because the platform will be in use at least for 10 years I think the language should be chosen carefully as well. I'm already running Mono on possible target platform. Beside that I'm to dumb to compile Mono with my Compiler (according to Google more or less everyone else has the same problems), it's already running. I've written some benchmarks for our specific needs and I was quite impressed that Mono was never more than twice as slow compared to plain C. Memory usage is OK, and when I remove all unneeded files the footprint is acceptable. I just like to know if anyone else uses Mono on an embedded platform? Did you have any problems? Things which everyone should consider?
Given that the iPhone and Android are ARM, Mono is very well supported on ARM. And because Novell sells supported versions of Mono targeting those platforms, it is likely to stay well supported for quite some time.
One thing to note is the Mono runtime is licensed under the LGPL, so you need to ensure your usage complies with the license, or you will need to purchase a commercial license for Mono.
Does iPhone SDK 3.0 or 3.1 support Power PC machines having Leopard 10.5 or above? If not then what's the solution for the same results, I have a Mac with Power PC and Panther. I will upgrade to Leopard and install iPhone SDK.
Okay. The answers so far are NOT correct. For some reason, the iPhone SDK has been shipping as a Universal Binary for ages. So, yes, you CAN use a Power PC mac for iPhone development. I've done it and it's verrry dirty.
It's involved and a serious pain. It doesn't work all of the time and there are numerous bugs. It works well enough if you're ABSOLUTELY dedicated and ABSOLUTELY cannot afford a new computer.
Basically, you need to hack up the install XML properties in the installation package. Get rid of the "Intel" check javascript-ish code and/or make it always return true. This will enable the "iPhone SDK" checkbox in the installer.
Once you install it, you can use the SDK and cross-compile to ARM (iPhone processor). The simulator even works, but your milage may vary. My experience was so awful that I simply purchased an Intel Power Mac.
You'll need to hack up the install script for every update. This will involve converting the DMG to read/write beforehand. Editing some Javascript embedded in the XML installation package. Then, hacking up your build properties to get rid of "Native System" selections. It's actually very very painful.
You can Google "how" to do it in more detail. I do not suggest EVER releasing to the Apple store with this method. If you just want to play and get accustomed to the platform, then it might work for you.
Again, I MUST stress, this is very very unstable and totally unsupported. Please know what you are doing before you even consider attempting it.
Yes, it's possible. No, it's not fun.
The iPhone SDK only works on Macs with Intel processors. If you want to save money, you might be able to get the iPhone SDK working on a Hackintosh, but building a Hackintosh may be illegal and applying software updates will be annoying.
I suggest looking for a cheap second-hand Intel-based Mac Mini.
As noted by Will, since the SDK only supports the Intel processors, you are limited to a newer Mac unless you build a Hackintosh which may or may not be legal. However, you also don't need the latest and greatest machine to write software with, although better hardware does help! So you have a couple of options if you are looking to save money in that you could get a refurbished Mac from Apple or check around on eBay or Craigslist to see if you could get one.
Is there an IDE that I can load on a Blackberry, E71, or an iPhone?
Apple released iPhone SDK for XCode a while back, check out developer.apple.com and Nokia also release their own SDK check out forum.nokia.com
But for pure Java Midlet goodness, i would recommend Netbeans (netbeans.org) their netbeans mobile application editor is a gem, second to none.
To answer your question, i don't think any phone is powerful enough to compile and test the code on themselves, so no ...
Not that I know of, typically you'll develop apps on a desktop machine (PC/MAC whatever) and download/control the application on the phone. Also I don't think Java is available on a standard (non-cracked) iPhone.
There was a palm based C compiler. I had some trouble finding it though, but it's called OnBoard-C. It didn't exactly have an IDE, it compiled notes. Considering there's a lack of embedded compilers, I'd be surprised to find full embedded IDEs. Oh... I recall there being a Scheme or Lisp too.
This maybe premature but, congrats, you just found a market niche.