Re: [Simulavr-devel] [patch #7032] unitialized HWUart, did never finish sending

[Petr Hluzín]

Hi Thomas, hello list users

(Accidentally no replied to list before.)

2009/12/21 ThomasK <address@hidden>:
> Unfortunately, that would be on Onno's and my repo and not on CVS repo. But
> I have seen, that you use subversion (I assume it, revisions dosn't exists
> on CVS and git uses hash id's :-) )

SVN, correct. (CVS does use revisions, in 1.xxx form.)

> One question for my interrest: you suggest to make it possible to write
> device types with mixed case letters. (ATmega16 instead of atmega16) What's
> the benefit of it? My opinion was, that to write device types for simulavr
> in the same way as used for avr-gcc (compiler does only accept lower case
> names) would prevent confusion and make it a little bit easier in build
> scripts for more than one device.

Because the ATmegaXX is the canonical (manufacturer's) name. The
processor's name is ATmega16, not atmega16.
A compiler, simulator, etc are not in position to reject official
names. It is even the most common form when people take the effort to
capitalize things. (First argument.)

Because people in general do not perceive the difference in case. It
would require a second thought to realize that. And we can remove the
need for the extra thought and care. (Second argument.)

Do users test if their MCU type is ok for compiler by feeding it to
simulator the first? I think they do not, they feed it to compiler
first (usually by makefile). In such case the relaxed requirement in
simulator does not matter.
If they feed it to simulator first (perhaps because something went
wrong ant they are trying to recover) they will benefit by knowing
that their MCU type is at least somewhat correct. (Third argument.)

Or is the compiler's error message that much confusing that simulavrxx
is a acting as a substitute in providing diagnostics? (An argument for
lower-case-only.)

(Cannot we fix the compiler?)

By the way avrdude uses (and used to require) a "code" of m16 for that
chip. What about requiring "m16"?

It smells like adjusting an interface suit machine well at expense of humans.

> And a last question: you refer in your post to Onno's repo. (see above) Did
> you used or tried it?

I have not, my changes are bit older. My repository is based on CVS
around 2009-06. I made quick look at Onno's git repo. I found some
interesting changes and some fixes I independently made, too. I found
a discussion about a repository/version-system on the list but I did
not see a conclusion.

(I want to keep some changes in my private repository.)

> happy xmas at all, Thomas

Happy holidays, too!

--
Petr Hluzin