Jump to content
43oh

pabigot

Members
  • Content Count

    577
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    30

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from bluehash in pronunciation   
    So, as best I can reconstruct: Russian ???????, English Energia, IPA /??n?r?ij
  2. Like
    pabigot reacted to Automate in panStamp switching to CC430   
    The new panStamp NRG is still in beta.  If you e-mail them or post in the panStamp forum they may have some they can sell you.
  3. Like
    pabigot reacted to energia in pronunciation   
    The video clip indeed has the right pronunciation. The G is hard and as @@spirilis writes: Eh-ner-GEE-ah.
     
    Here is another clip: http://shtooka.net/listen/rus/%D1%8D%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%B8%D1%8F
     
    Robert 
  4. Like
    pabigot reacted to spirilis in pronunciation   
    Yeah, the 'g' is a hard G, not a soft G.
     
    Eh-ner-GEE-ah (hard 'G' like in 'GIVE')
  5. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from abecedarian in Scan Interface Applications - Five Members Win A Target Board And An MSP-FET   
    There are still plenty of infelicities, if not bugs, but for the record I intend to use msp430-elf for all my own future development.  I do, however, build my own from upstream gcc to which RedHat doesn't always promptly push their updates (e.g. the large memory support in the current TI release hasn't been upstreamed yet).
     
    I also have a local git archive that tracks all the TI public releases (source and headers), which I'll put on github next time I'm working MSP430.  Makes it easier to figure out what changed with each release (and what's not yet pushed upstream).
  6. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from abecedarian in Source archive for msp430-elf on github   
    I don't actually build from these sources, though I do use the headers as-is.  I believe others here have done so and have posted instructions either elsewhere on the forums or on the mspgcc users mailing list.  Unless you intend to modify the sources you're probably better off downloading the pre-built ones from TI.  In fact, you should be able to update to the latest msp430-elf version automatically from within CCS.  Energia should also have support for it, but probably not IAR which is a competing product.
  7. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from abecedarian in Source archive for msp430-elf on github   
    Several people liked this post which I took as interest in the mentioned archive of source and headers for TI's public releases of their msp430 gcc toolchain.  I've now made this available on github at: https://github.com/pabigot/msp430-elf
     
    There's nothing you get there that isn't from TI, but it can be useful to determine what changed in each release, so you know what to look for in the upstream gcc repository.
     
    Updates to this repository will be best-effort on my part: no promises.
  8. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from Rickta59 in Source archive for msp430-elf on github   
    Several people liked this post which I took as interest in the mentioned archive of source and headers for TI's public releases of their msp430 gcc toolchain.  I've now made this available on github at: https://github.com/pabigot/msp430-elf
     
    There's nothing you get there that isn't from TI, but it can be useful to determine what changed in each release, so you know what to look for in the upstream gcc repository.
     
    Updates to this repository will be best-effort on my part: no promises.
  9. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from simpleavr in Source archive for msp430-elf on github   
    Several people liked this post which I took as interest in the mentioned archive of source and headers for TI's public releases of their msp430 gcc toolchain.  I've now made this available on github at: https://github.com/pabigot/msp430-elf
     
    There's nothing you get there that isn't from TI, but it can be useful to determine what changed in each release, so you know what to look for in the upstream gcc repository.
     
    Updates to this repository will be best-effort on my part: no promises.
  10. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from timotet in Scan Interface Applications - Five Members Win A Target Board And An MSP-FET   
    There are still plenty of infelicities, if not bugs, but for the record I intend to use msp430-elf for all my own future development.  I do, however, build my own from upstream gcc to which RedHat doesn't always promptly push their updates (e.g. the large memory support in the current TI release hasn't been upstreamed yet).
     
    I also have a local git archive that tracks all the TI public releases (source and headers), which I'll put on github next time I'm working MSP430.  Makes it easier to figure out what changed with each release (and what's not yet pushed upstream).
  11. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from greeeg in Scan Interface Applications - Five Members Win A Target Board And An MSP-FET   
    There are still plenty of infelicities, if not bugs, but for the record I intend to use msp430-elf for all my own future development.  I do, however, build my own from upstream gcc to which RedHat doesn't always promptly push their updates (e.g. the large memory support in the current TI release hasn't been upstreamed yet).
     
    I also have a local git archive that tracks all the TI public releases (source and headers), which I'll put on github next time I'm working MSP430.  Makes it easier to figure out what changed with each release (and what's not yet pushed upstream).
  12. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from spirilis in Scan Interface Applications - Five Members Win A Target Board And An MSP-FET   
    There are still plenty of infelicities, if not bugs, but for the record I intend to use msp430-elf for all my own future development.  I do, however, build my own from upstream gcc to which RedHat doesn't always promptly push their updates (e.g. the large memory support in the current TI release hasn't been upstreamed yet).
     
    I also have a local git archive that tracks all the TI public releases (source and headers), which I'll put on github next time I'm working MSP430.  Makes it easier to figure out what changed with each release (and what's not yet pushed upstream).
  13. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from OppaErich in and again weird errors - Keil uVision   
    I don't use CCS but in general if the instruction pointer is past the last point where a local variable is used, the debugger information may be removed because the stack space or register has been reassigned to another purpose.
  14. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from Rickta59 in GCC for MSP430 officially out of beta   
    From the binutils used in mspgcc:

    commit 5a5c7b9cfa1ca229f661e5080f1af7584753c900 Author: Peter A. Bigot <pabigot@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Thu Feb 10 17:01:58 2011 -0600 SF 3177314: undefined reference with too many template parameters This patch eliminates bounds on the length of symbols and instruction operands, and some rather inefficient string processing operations. Storage of the appropriate length for a specific symbol is dynamically allocated, and freed when no longer necessary. And it's a binutils bug, not a gcc bug. Still worth filing, and the binutils folks are a little more responsive. https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ 
    Unfortunately I couldn't get a usable copyright assignment from TI for the work they funded, which included the binutils cleanups that this patch belongs to, so my patch can't be merged upstream.
  15. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from Rickta59 in GCC for MSP430 officially out of beta   
    If you can create a standalone reproducer, this is the sort of thing that should be reported to gcc: here for the instructions and here for the bug registry.
     
    There's only a low probability that it'll get any attention from a maintainer, but there's always a chance and either way it'll provide a central location for everybody who runs into it to discuss potential workarounds.
  16. Like
    pabigot reacted to Rickta59 in GCC for MSP430 officially out of beta   
    I've had good luck with the msp430-elf-gcc 4.9.1 version included with CCS 6.  However, it still has issues with the iomacros.h file. They fixed some problems with it but not all. It fails when you try to include <msp430.h> in msp430 assembler files (the ones ending in .S). You can include a fixed version before loading msp430.h and it seems to be happy. (find my hacked up version here: https://gist.github.com/RickKimball/f4786191b8fd88de0338 )
     
    I'm sad they are leaving you out of the loop @@pabigot. We all appreciated your attention to detail.  
     
    -rick
  17. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from roadrunner84 in GCC for MSP430 officially out of beta   
    Great.  Now all they have to do is release the source code.  (Unless they just decided to rebranch version 371 as non-beta, or that announcement preceded the actual release of the non-beta version.  Right now, only the 371 version from May is available for download.)
  18. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from uberscientist in msp430-elf-gcc errors on builtin SR function   
    Just for grins, try specifying a void return type on your function definition, and play around with the order of the return type and attribute declaration and the function declaration. It may be that the attribute is being associated with the implicit int return type, not with the function itself.
  19. Like
    pabigot reacted to mpigsley in While(1) not Executing with Timer Interrupt   
    @@pabigot The capture compare flag needs to be manually reset after each ISR execution?
     
    From the user guide page 11-20:
     
     
    @@greeeg Even after removing Low Power Mode I'm still getting that starvation. 
  20. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from Pradeepa in How to determine the instructions encoding? [T1, T2,T3,T4]   
    The bit value of the instruction tells you which encoding it is. For example, if it were T1 the first four bits would be 1101 and the instruction value would be 0xd???. Since it's 0xe000 you know it's encoding T2. It can't be T3 or T4 since they'd be 32-bit instructions beginning with 0xf???????.
     
    So it appears to be an unconditional branch to an 11-bit immediate offset from PC, where the value of the offset is zero.
     
    I'm guessing it's an extremely optimized idle loop in an interrupt-driven application.
  21. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from igor in Architecture for conditional compilation in Energia   
    For any compiler there will be vendor- and architecture-specific flags that you can determine. For gcc the following incantation will display them:

    echo | arm-none-eabi-gcc -dM -E - | grep -i arm This gets you things like:
    #define __ARM_SIZEOF_WCHAR_T 32 #define __ARM_ARCH_ISA_ARM 1 #define __ARMEL__ 1 #define __ARM_FP 12 #define __ARM_NEON_FP 4 #define __ARM_SIZEOF_MINIMAL_ENUM 1 #define __ARM_PCS 1 #define __VERSION__ "4.8.3 20131129 (release) [ARM/embedded-4_8-branch revision 205641]" #define __ARM_ARCH_ISA_THUMB 1 #define __ARM_ARCH 4 #define __arm__ 1 #define __ARM_ARCH_4T__ 1 #define __ARM_EABI__ 1 If you need to support different vendor compilers, what I generally do is use these pre-defined flags to set some generic flag in a common header; e.g. you could detect and define ENERGIA_TIVAC, ENERGIA_TM4C129, ENERGIA_TM4C123, ENERGIA_MSP430, etc. to whatever level of refinement is important.
  22. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from seesoe in Job offers on 43oh   
    "Give back" is a tricky subject. I give a discounted rate to customers who are willing to open-source any re-usable aspects of the solution I develop for them. I find that approach is not understood by most corporations, though.
     
    Based on the details @@bluehash has provided I think a small (~ 5$) fixed-price fee for any solicitation is a reasonable solution: making the solicitor have "skin in the game" should reduce the spam considerably. I'd hope the micropayment infrastructure would not be a huge impediment. A "free if the result is made public" policy is probably too complex to work.
  23. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from spirilis in Job offers on 43oh   
    "Give back" is a tricky subject. I give a discounted rate to customers who are willing to open-source any re-usable aspects of the solution I develop for them. I find that approach is not understood by most corporations, though.
     
    Based on the details @@bluehash has provided I think a small (~ 5$) fixed-price fee for any solicitation is a reasonable solution: making the solicitor have "skin in the game" should reduce the spam considerably. I'd hope the micropayment infrastructure would not be a huge impediment. A "free if the result is made public" policy is probably too complex to work.
  24. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from spirilis in Job offers on 43oh   
    Given how 43oh collects postings across a couple microcontroller lines including Tiva and STM stuff, I think postings for pay or barter-compensated contract projects involving microcontroller hardware or software development would be appropriate, even if they aren't MSP430-specific (sometimes an MSP430 may not be the right solution). I don't see a clear need to support searches for new employees, since those have a well-developed Internet infrastructure.
     
    A fee to advertize for opportunities with value exceeding some limit ($10K?) makes sense, but without the limit would probably drive off somebody who wants to do an in-kind expertise or hardware swap that would otherwise fit 43oh's culture well. Though perhaps not enforceable, I'd also prefer to see requests only from principals (those who want the work done), not from head-hunters, or at least require mediated offers to be clearly labelled since they affect the contract value.
  25. Like
    pabigot got a reaction from seesoe in Job offers on 43oh   
    Given how 43oh collects postings across a couple microcontroller lines including Tiva and STM stuff, I think postings for pay or barter-compensated contract projects involving microcontroller hardware or software development would be appropriate, even if they aren't MSP430-specific (sometimes an MSP430 may not be the right solution). I don't see a clear need to support searches for new employees, since those have a well-developed Internet infrastructure.
     
    A fee to advertize for opportunities with value exceeding some limit ($10K?) makes sense, but without the limit would probably drive off somebody who wants to do an in-kind expertise or hardware swap that would otherwise fit 43oh's culture well. Though perhaps not enforceable, I'd also prefer to see requests only from principals (those who want the work done), not from head-hunters, or at least require mediated offers to be clearly labelled since they affect the contract value.
×
×
  • Create New...