> > >If you have a look at the current toolchain for the AT94 it will be > >immediately clear ( look for co-verification ) as to why it would be > >advantageous for Atmel to be able to source low cost modules to make the > >CPU&sea of gates ubiquitous. > > That still doesn't answer the question what does Brad want a C compiler > for. > ( Tasking don't have an AVR compiler so this wild speculation may be miles wide of reality anyway but whats life without gossip with the girls ;- ) To put together an operational AT94K application, using the co-verification process, you need a C compiler or assembler which can communicate with the VHDL compiler. The C compiler is for the AVR CPU core and the VHDL compiler is for the FPGA section. If you are going to work in this area then it would appear that you will need a similar tool chain, if you don't need to work with SOC's then you won't. As people still like dealing in schematic entry of certain functionality you also need a schematic front end for the FPGA compiler & compared to ALL of the low end FPGA systems PROTEL is WAY AHEAD with the Schematic entry bit. I haven't used Accolade so I can't comment on its functionality as a VHDL system. Protel may only be suppling isolated modules to Atmel at present but the other thing to look at is the fact that it must be hard to sell low end VHDL tools to clients directly when the chip manufacturers are all giving them away ( or charging a pittance... ) hence the need to enter into aggreements with the manufacturers. The other issue is that there are more suppliers selling simple PCB/Schematic systems. Given the momentum which the SOC area has, I would suspect that Protel would rather be riding on the bus when it arrives rather than waiting to get run over by it. Also the supplier which gets the individual modules in common use in subsidised packages would have an advantage in selling 'full' systems later on. Why else would a rumoured 100K of high end tools be offered for a short test drive with the current Atmel system. > And now I'm going to get very cynical. Has anyone here managed to create a > schematic which could be simulated and could generate a netlist for PCB > layout? No argument from me there, the experience has been dissapointing at best... > Protel's PLD product can't even create a schematic symbol with pin names > for compiled devices let alone support back and forward annotation. Ditto > > Basically I don't much buy the idea of integrating everything in design > explorer (actually I would have bought the idea of using design explorer as > a container for all design information including C and VHDL code if they > hadn't made such a mess of it - I don't have any compilers which read > source files as OLE objects for example). Definately no argument here. Allowing you to store a file in the database as a one way process was reeeaaalllyyy silly! ( Less polite descriptions fly to mind ) Unfortunately while the software industry is driven by the Fashion Industry ( Marketing triumphs over Engineering and common sense) we don't seem to have much choice. Personally I would settle for a bug free Schematic/PCB Cad package with a functional, reasonable and affordable router but then I'm old grumpy & tired of trying to use permanently beta software to make a living. ( 99SESP5+ helped ;-) Cheers Don * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/subscrib.html * - or email - * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
