Command languaje for tiny microcontrollers

[brucehoult]

The ability to instantly try something without noticeable time penalty (compilation or execution) is valuable. You have to have experienced it to realise that.

Just to emphasise that, here's something from a 39 year old book, indicating what had already been achieved bfore 1983.

There are two kinds of programmers:

1) those for whom 1983 is unimaginably far in the past, when dinosaurs roamed the Earth

2) we dinosaurs

[nctnico]

The ability to have a fast interactive mechanism for "trying out" code is key to productivity.

Sure. I do this all the time. Compiling a small snippet of C or Assembler code and programming it on the chip takes couple seconds. How much faster do you need?

After a while it will be more than a small snippet or couple of lines of C, and it will take more than a couple of seconds to compile and download. Even 1 minute is enough to break the flow of interactive debugging. Whether breaking the flow is a problem is a separate issue, of course.

The ability to instantly try something without noticeable time penalty (compilation or execution) is valuable. You have to have experienced it to realise that.

I agree. While developing software for microcontrollers I almost always implement commands to call certain functions (using a command line interface). That way I can try various combinations of parameters and/or redo the same tests later on for checking whether things still work as expected.

[tggzzz]

The ability to instantly try something without noticeable time penalty (compilation or execution) is valuable. You have to have experienced it to realise that.

Just to emphasise that, here's something from a 39 year old book, indicating what had already been achieved bfore 1983.

There are two kinds of programmers:

1) those for whom 1983 is unimaginably far in the past, when dinosaurs roamed the Earth

2) we dinosaurs

I don't object to youngsters thinking some things are far in the past.

I do object to them triumphantly reinventing an old concept, badly - and claiming it is new. I hate chrome plated elliptical wheels; they are too jarring.

[tggzzz]

The ability to have a fast interactive mechanism for "trying out" code is key to productivity.

Sure. I do this all the time. Compiling a small snippet of C or Assembler code and programming it on the chip takes couple seconds. How much faster do you need?

After a while it will be more than a small snippet or couple of lines of C, and it will take more than a couple of seconds to compile and download. Even 1 minute is enough to break the flow of interactive debugging. Whether breaking the flow is a problem is a separate issue, of course.

The ability to instantly try something without noticeable time penalty (compilation or execution) is valuable. You have to have experienced it to realise that.

I agree. While developing software for microcontrollers I almost always implement commands to call certain functions (using a command line interface). That way I can try various combinations of parameters and/or redo the same tests later on for checking whether things still work as expected.

When it comes to small memory MCUs, I hate stripping the fat out of scanf/printf over and over and over again. It is pleasant if someone has already done that for me within a tiny interpreter.

And yes, in the 70s I did implement floating point arithmetic and trig amd i/o functions on a 6800; IIRC a sin/cos CORDIC pair took ~40ms. It was a vacation job after my first year at university. Very useful too, since another part of the task made me realise why/where sempahores are necessary.

[IDEngineer]

 I was speaking of asking about a specific development scenario. Even then you'll get multiple answers from single individuals. Heck, even I would probably have multiple answers. Might depend on which scope I feel like driving that day, which could end up making all other equipment choices.

[NorthGuy]

So who is more efficient... the guy who can brag about a bleeding edge clock rate, or the guy whose machine isn't running unnecessary things and never interrupts for updates and changes no one asked for?

My main PC is i5-2500 running Windows 7. It's probably 10 years old but everything flies as I try to avoid bloated software, mostly, Vivado of course ...

I used to upgrade PCs every 2-3 years, but then I didn't like Windows 8, and Windows 10 of course was a disaster where Microsoft is in full control. So, I wanted to go with Linux, but then I thought I'd stay with Windows 7. But it was too late. Now hardware gets more and more incompatible with Windows 7, so I keep procrastinating and deciding between Windows 7 (on not so new PC) and Linux. I have few PCs running Windows 8.1, Windows 10, and Windows 11, and I don't see anything in them more appealing compared to Windows 7.

[brucehoult]

You can always run Windows 7 in a VM on Linux for the few things that actually need Windows. VirtualBox works fine and is free. It's what I use to run corporate-mandated stuff.

[PlainName]

You can always run Windows 7 in a VM on Linux for the few things that actually need Windows

There are some thing that need Windows, but for me it's as much about workflow as anything else. Does Linux have Listary or anything even remotely close, for instance? DOpus? How about Macrium Reflect? Just three utils that make the PC experience very slick, and it would be pointless running in a VM unless that VM is the main desktop. Which kind of defeats the point.

[nctnico]

You can always run Windows 7 in a VM on Linux for the few things that actually need Windows

There are some thing that need Windows, but for me it's as much about workflow as anything else. Does Linux have Listary or anything even remotely close, for instance? DOpus? How about Macrium Reflect? Just three utils that make the PC experience very slick, and it would be pointless running in a VM unless that VM is the main desktop. Which kind of defeats the point.

Those utils you mention are actually very old concepts that are available on Linux (Unix) as standard for a long time.

[brucehoult]

You can always run Windows 7 in a VM on Linux for the few things that actually need Windows

There are some thing that need Windows, but for me it's as much about workflow as anything else. Does Linux have Listary or anything even remotely close, for instance? DOpus? How about Macrium Reflect? Just three utils that make the PC experience very slick, and it would be pointless running in a VM unless that VM is the main desktop. Which kind of defeats the point.

Those utils you mention are actually very old concepts that are available on Linux (Unix) as standard for a long time.

I've never heard of any of them but it seems the first is just some kind of Spotlight clone, the second is roughly an enhanced Midnight Commander, and the 3rd backup.

So, nothing special?

[PlainName]

the first is just some kind of Spotlight clone

Kind of. Its main benefit is to integrate into the standard OS file dialogs to quickly change folder. For instance, the app alway sets file open to ~/appdata/app/user or similar, whereas I've just saved (from another app) to r:/temp. One click change. Of course, there are favourites, searching and all that stuff, but they are not the primary use.

It's greatest feature, that I use a lot, is to use some other file explorer app/dialog. For instance, you choose file save and the app opens up the last folder it saved to (say, ~/long path/project1). But you in DOpus you have open ~/long other path/project20. No problem, Listary will instantly change the file save dialog to the project20 path. You don't realise how useful this is until you use it (kind of like mouse wheels and back buttons).

the second is roughly an enhanced Midnight Commander

You could say Midnight Commander is roughly an enhanced Explorer. There is much more to it than that. Much more.

and the 3rd backup

Which shows you don't realise what you're missing. Yes, it's a backup (and restore - don't forget that). But it write images. And significantly it can do that on a live system - this uses Windows shadow service, but there are similar that use their own variation of same. There are none that can do that on Linux - if you have open files you can't back them up.

Further, it does incremental and differential images. Significantly, it knows which main a diff or inc comes from. That is, you can do a main on media1 and a main on media2, then diff on media1, another diff on media1, then a diff on media2. The diff on media2 will be correct and completely unaffected by whatever is on media1. And a further diff on media1 will be unaffected by whatever is on media2. Ditto for incs, of course.

Result is that you can have multiple coherent backups, utilising differential and incremental stategies, completely independent of, and unaffected by, each other. And do that without having to pop off for a coffee while it happens.

[PlainName]

Forgot to also say that even if Linux had those exact tools available, they would be useless because that kind of thing doesn't cross the OS-VM interface. Which is, really, the point of a VM. And a reason I dislike having to run some often-used application in a VM, because it is difficult to use all these background productivity utilities that people seem not to notice exist.

[Nominal Animal]

There are none that can do that on Linux - if you have open files you can't back them up.

Eh?  Why would having a file open hinder backups at all?

Also, if you want snapshots, just use LVM2.  Atomic instant snapshots of the filesystem state at any given point in time, without blocking or pausing access to it, like on a parallel timeline; no filesystem support for it required either.  Doesn't even matter if the filesystem is being used by a virtual machine.  Do your backuppy stuff, even incremental or tar-based, and then drop the snapshot.  Trivial.  Well over decade-old, stable stuff.

I think you've just found a set of tools you like.  That's fine, nothing wrong with that.  Just don't go spreading lies about what "Linux cannot do", please.

[tggzzz]

I think you've just found a set of tools you like.  That's fine, nothing wrong with that.  Just don't go spreading lies about what "Linux cannot do", please.

Just so.

And preferably do it on another forum better suited to the usual flame wars 

[PlainName]

Eh?  Why would having a file open hinder backups at all?

Prevents access to the file, so it's missing from the backup.

Also, if you want snapshots, just use LVM2

Is there a backup util that replicates the Reflect features, whatever the underlying details? Every time I ask there appears not to be.

I think you've just found a set of tools you like.

I would hardly use every day a set of tools I disliked! (Hence why I am not on W10, of course.)

But you could also look at it as discovering the electric kettle when everyone raves about making a cuppa on a camp fire. That would be 'just a tool I like', wouldn't it?

Just don't go spreading lies about what "Linux cannot do"

Believe me, I would be deliriously happy if someone would come along and show Linux doing those things, because then I would really consider jumping ship. The backup is the major road hump at the moment (well, since forever really), and if there were a simple util that replicated Reflect that would go a looooong way. There is a company (Terrabyte) that makes a similar tool for Windows and Linux, but the Linux version cannot make an image while the OS is running. Since they surely know what they are doing (the Windows version does it, and they used to even manage it without the Windows shadow copy thing) I have to assume that there is some reason why it isn't possible and, as I keep pointing out, no-one has shown me that it is possible.

[PlainName]

And preferably do it on another forum better suited to the usual flame wars

I am not trying to start a flame war. In fact, I would love it if I was shown to be wrong. But, OTOH, you don't seem to have a problem with someone propagating the myth that a VM is the answer whenever sticking with Windows comes up.

[tggzzz]

And preferably do it on another forum better suited to the usual flame wars

I am not trying to start a flame war. In fact, I would love it if I was shown to be wrong. But, OTOH, you don't seem to have a problem with someone propagating the myth that a VM is the answer whenever sticking with Windows comes up.

Do you make a habit of deliberately snipping the relevant context thereby misrepresenting other people in order to make a point? That's called a "strawman argument", and is generally regarded as being "suboptimal behaviour".[1]

Here's the full context, https://www.eevblog.com/forum/microcontrollers/partcl-command-languaje-for-tiny-microcontrollers/msg4468279/#msg4468279
and everybody can see that I wasn't even replying to you!

EDIT: [1] your posting style coupled with the slightly provocative moniker tickled my memory. It seems you do have form in that respect, e.g.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/supporters-lounge/legalities/msg4415617/#msg4415617
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/important-poll-should-there-be-an-off-topic-section/msg4410943/#msg4410943

[woofy]

on Linux - if you have open files you can't back them up.

As far as I know, Linux copies open files just fine. In fact I'm not sure there is a way to stop it doing so.

[PlainName]

deliberately snipping the relevant context

I quote what I am commenting on as succinctly as seems relevant. If you want to see more it's easy to find, but entire threads of quoted quotes of quotes is pretty bad.

If you think the context is missing then it's either because you don't appreciate the point of my argument, or because I missed some context that you consider important. There is no deliberate misrepresentation intended, or implied.

[PlainName]

on Linux - if you have open files you can't back them up.

As far as I know, Linux copies open files just fine. In fact I'm not sure there is a way to stop it doing so.

Can't they be read locked?

Perhaps that's not the cause, then. It may be that 'image' is the show-stopper.

[tggzzz]

deliberately snipping the relevant context

I quote what I am commenting on as succinctly as seems relevant. If you want to see more it's easy to find, but entire threads of quoted quotes of quotes is pretty bad.

If you think the context is missing then it's either because you don't appreciate the point of my argument, or because I missed some context that you consider important. There is no deliberate misrepresentation intended, or implied.

You should be as succinct as possible, but not "succincter".

Whether or not you intend to misrepresent people is irrelevant. You do misrepresent them. Repeatedly. Deliberately. I demonstrated that with the links I gave and which, surprise, surprise, you snipped.

You make it so difficult for all the readers to find that they won't bother - to your benefit. That
attitude is difficult to distinguish from that of a troll, which arguably isn't inconsistent with your moniker. OTOH if there is a reason for.your moniker, I'm curious to hear it!

Make it easier for your readers and yourself by doing less, i.e. by not snipping context. Go.on; I dare you!

[PlainName]

if there is a reason for.your moniker, I'm curious to hear it

Based on a different moniker (which doesn't lend itself at all to conspiracy theories), it was the one that managed to skip all the 'sorry, that already exists' filters whilst still being loosely related and all I could come up with on the spur of the moment. It is entirely meaningless except for being obscure unless you know my other IDs.

[woofy]

on Linux - if you have open files you can't back them up.

As far as I know, Linux copies open files just fine. In fact I'm not sure there is a way to stop it doing so.

Can't they be read locked?

Perhaps that's not the cause, then. It may be that 'image' is the show-stopper.

I don't know of a way to read lock a file.
Files can be protected against being written/modified/deleted (even with admin rights) by setting the i flag, but they are still readable.

[tggzzz]

if there is a reason for.your moniker, I'm curious to hear it

Based on a different moniker (which doesn't lend itself at all to conspiracy theories), it was the one that managed to skip all the 'sorry, that already exists' filters whilst still being loosely related and all I could come up with on the spur of the moment. It is entirely meaningless except for being obscure unless you know my other IDs.

Fair enough

Make it easier for your readers and yourself by doing less, i.e. by not snipping context. Go.on; I dare you! Just use the 'quote' button at the top right of the relevant message, which automatically inserts a link to the message, then add your contribution.

[PlainName]

if there is a reason for.your moniker, I'm curious to hear it

Based on a different moniker (which doesn't lend itself at all to conspiracy theories), it was the one that managed to skip all the 'sorry, that already exists' filters whilst still being loosely related and all I could come up with on the spur of the moment. It is entirely meaningless except for being obscure unless you know my other IDs.

Fair enough

Make it easier for your readers and yourself by doing less, i.e. by not snipping context. Go.on; I dare you! Just use the 'quote' button at the top right of the relevant message, which automatically inserts a link to the message, then add your contribution.

So how do you know which bit I am commenting to? Is it my username, your suggestion, your acceptance, something else?