[Icc-mot] ImageCraft Blog

[Richard Man]

At 07:24 AM 7/18/2008, Jim Fiocca wrote:
>Not sure if you were looking for feedback on what you wrote on the 
>blog, but I guess I'll give it anyway.
>
>Speaking from a Freescale processor point of view, we all have the 
>option to go to CodeWarrior if we want a big, bloated, full-featured 
>IDE with integrated debugger.  We (I) choose Imagecraft because it 
>is cheaper and less complicated.  I disagree with the whole premise 
>of upgrading the IDE.  I'd be happy if the product didn't have an 
>IDE at all (I only use it from the command line, with a Makefile).

Hi JIm, I am always looking for input. Your points are well taken, 
and our core competence and core focus will always be the compiler 
support. There is no worry in that regard.

Hence the decision not to rewrite the IDE ourselves, that'd really 
take resources away from our core competence.

>I think you should direct your energy into the compiler itself, and 
>adding support for such things as XGATE, for example.

We attempted to add XGate asm support more than a year ago. It's a 
difficult to understand piece of work, what with the convoluted HC12 
expanded addressing and the S12X addition etc. In the end, very few 
people care. Now the latest S12X may not support XGate either.

Business wise, the sad reality with Freescale is that Freescale's 
main focus is on its automotive customers, and on the other hand, it 
is effectively killing its third party vendors by giving away free compilers.

// richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly, 
please use richard at imagecraft.com)