Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #31160

Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC?

Show all headers | View raw

On 20/07/2022 21:55, Phil Hobbs wrote:
> David Brown wrote:
>> On 20/07/2022 13:49, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
>>> I wonder why some developers choose non-free compilers (Keil, IAR, 
>>> Cosmic, Raisonance, etc) when targeting architectures supported by 
>>> the free Small Device C Compiler (SDCC). Answears that also mention 
>>> the architecture besides the reasons would be particularly helpful.
>>
>> I rarely use microcontrollers that work with SDCC, but others at the 
>> same company have.  There are a few reasons, I think, that lead to 
>> SDCC not being chosen despite its obvious advantages (cost being the 
>> main one).  These are not in order, and I don't know how relevant they 
>> are in the grand scheme of things.
>>
>> 1. Manufacturers often recommend Keil or IAR, rarely SDCC.
>>
>> 2. Demo code is often for Keil or IAR.  With these kinds of devices, 
>> there is invariably non-standard code or extensions so code can't 
>> easily be ported between compilers.
>>
>> 3. Pre-written code - either within the company, or from outside - is 
>> hard to port to SDCC.  You usually have to stick with the previous tools.
>>
>> 4. New developers get familiar with Keil or IAR from university.
>>
>> 5. There is a perception (I can't say if it is fair or not) that SDCC 
>> gives less efficient results than the big name compilers.
>>
>>
> 
> Plus,
> 
> 6. When you hit a bug, there's somebody being paid to answer your phone 
> calls.
> 

My experience with big commercial toolchains is that this does not 
always help - often the support people have very little technical 
experience or knowledge.  Maybe I just don't ask stupid enough 
questions.  But I have heard (reliably) of toolchain support departments 
where the people dedicated to helping with dongles and software license 
locking problems outnumber the technical toolchain support staff by a 
factor of 3.  Of course there are exceptions - some big name toolchains 
have excellent support staff.

My experience with open source toolchains is that you don't have a 
number to call, but you can find good help fast from forums, mailing 
lists, etc.   And you can quickly get in contact with people involved in 
the development of the toolchains, not just a support monkey that won't 
listen to your question until you have installed all the Windows service 
packs and rebooted your PC.

I don't know about SDCC, but for gcc there are several ways to get 
commercial support - including from companies heavily involved in the 
development of the toolchains.  Since you are paying for the support, 
not the software, it always has to be good quality.

But none of that contradicts the fact that "there is someone on the 
phone to help and/or yell at" being a significant reason for people to 
choose big name commercial toolchains over free and open source solutions.

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-07-20 13:49 +0200
  Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? "Peter Heitzer" <peter.heitzer@rz.uni-regensburg.de> - 2022-07-20 14:23 +0000
  Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-07-20 18:33 +0200
    Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2022-07-20 15:55 -0400
      Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-07-21 12:58 +0200
        Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2022-07-21 15:05 +0000
          Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2022-07-21 13:18 -0400
            Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Clifford Heath <no_spam@please.net> - 2022-07-22 13:00 +1000
              Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2022-07-22 09:27 -0400
              Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? boB <boB@K7IQ.com> - 2022-08-25 19:14 -0700
                Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? chris <chris-nospam@tridac.net> - 2022-08-26 17:17 +0100
                Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-08-26 18:45 +0200
    Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2022-07-21 11:10 -0700
      Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2022-07-21 21:56 +0300
      Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-07-21 20:56 +0200
  Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? chris <chris-nospam@tridac.net> - 2022-07-22 12:04 +0100
  Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2022-09-01 23:25 -0700
  Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Michael Schwingen <news-1513678000@discworld.dascon.de> - 2022-09-04 20:39 +0000
  Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-09-05 17:33 +0200
    Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2022-09-05 10:32 -0700
      Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-09-06 09:22 +0200
        Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2022-09-06 01:59 -0700
          Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-09-06 12:12 +0200
            Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2022-09-06 04:26 -0700
        Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-09-06 11:09 +0200
          Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2022-09-06 12:41 +0200
            Re: Why use non-free compilers (Keil, etc) for architectures supported by SDCC? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-09-06 15:00 +0200

csiph-web