<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Benefits of using e#</title>
	<atom:link href="http://hutorny.in.ua/projects/e/benefits-of-using-e/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://hutorny.in.ua/projects/e/benefits-of-using-e</link>
	<description>Programming in a small</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Apr 2010 20:19:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: edt</title>
		<link>http://hutorny.in.ua/projects/e/benefits-of-using-e/comment-page-1#comment-35</link>
		<dc:creator>edt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Sep 2006 22:01:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hutorny.in.ua/projects/e/benefits-of-using-e#comment-35</guid>
		<description>No, by tools I meant compilers, simulators, in-circuit debuggers, etc.  Possibly IDE&#039;s, too, but I wouldn&#039;t consider an IDE a development tool in anywhere near the same sense as those.

VHDL is a cool idea, too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, by tools I meant compilers, simulators, in-circuit debuggers, etc.  Possibly IDE&#8217;s, too, but I wouldn&#8217;t consider an IDE a development tool in anywhere near the same sense as those.</p>
<p>VHDL is a cool idea, too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene</title>
		<link>http://hutorny.in.ua/projects/e/benefits-of-using-e/comment-page-1#comment-34</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Sep 2006 01:45:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hutorny.in.ua/projects/e/benefits-of-using-e#comment-34</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;1. Interfaces with other languages&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I envision it in this way: e# will provide (a) language constructions for interfacing with code compiled with other languages, such as assemblers and C; (b) ability to implement (program in e#) semantics for those language constructions. This approach will give essential degree of freedom to the developers ??“ they would be able to write their own implementation (or reuse third party code) if interfacing is not provided by the compiler vendor or provided implementation is not found satisfactory.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Also, I am thinking about interfacing with VHDL, but this is the question of the distant future, and, I think, would be the matter of bringing e# simulation model inside VHDL as an externally implemented entity&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;p&gt;2. Interfaces with other tools&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Other tools??¦ Do you mean IDE? At this time I may only say that Eclipse is the first candidate to integrate with.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;p&gt;3. Shortcomings&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Yes, you right - I am not opposing e# to HLL languages. If there is an HLL compiler for the target device producing code that fits the device resources, and the code performs the task ??“ why should one ever look for other tools/languages?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;e# is aiming developers for whom writing in assembly or C/assembly explosive mix is the only choice left. I have collected shortcoming I see in ASM, C and C+ASM in the &lt;a href=&quot;#table1&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;table 1&lt;/a&gt;. I expect e# will address all these shortcomings. &lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1. Interfaces with other languages</p>
<p>I envision it in this way: e# will provide (a) language constructions for interfacing with code compiled with other languages, such as assemblers and C; (b) ability to implement (program in e#) semantics for those language constructions. This approach will give essential degree of freedom to the developers ??“ they would be able to write their own implementation (or reuse third party code) if interfacing is not provided by the compiler vendor or provided implementation is not found satisfactory.<br />
Also, I am thinking about interfacing with VHDL, but this is the question of the distant future, and, I think, would be the matter of bringing e# simulation model inside VHDL as an externally implemented entity</p>
<p>2. Interfaces with other tools<br />
Other tools??¦ Do you mean IDE? At this time I may only say that Eclipse is the first candidate to integrate with.</p>
<p>3. Shortcomings<br />
Yes, you right &#8211; I am not opposing e# to HLL languages. If there is an HLL compiler for the target device producing code that fits the device resources, and the code performs the task ??“ why should one ever look for other tools/languages?<br />
e# is aiming developers for whom writing in assembly or C/assembly explosive mix is the only choice left. I have collected shortcoming I see in ASM, C and C+ASM in the <a href="#table1">table 1</a>. I expect e# will address all these shortcomings. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: edt</title>
		<link>http://hutorny.in.ua/projects/e/benefits-of-using-e/comment-page-1#comment-33</link>
		<dc:creator>edt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Sep 2006 05:18:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hutorny.in.ua/projects/e/benefits-of-using-e#comment-33</guid>
		<description>Very interesting ideas.  I&#039;m especially interested in the automated testing facilities and grouping/factoring of data (like inline simulation controls).

I&#039;m curious, though, what langs/tools e# would be intended to interface with and what shortcomings it would attempt to do away with in those tools it would replace.  For instance, syntax seems very similar to C, but you contrast e# to asm and hardly to C.

I also had a possibly related idea.  I know our company would have many uses for an efficient system to &#039;port&#039; MCU code to other languages for simulation.  We have a program to interact with networks of our products and there&#039;s been some random discussion about online demos of our product.  These environments need to simulate the devices, but the devices would only be represented as objects in the program with much more logic.  A very-high-level language such as e# might be able to generate simulation object code if that sort of need comes up often for most companies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very interesting ideas.  I&#8217;m especially interested in the automated testing facilities and grouping/factoring of data (like inline simulation controls).</p>
<p>I&#8217;m curious, though, what langs/tools e# would be intended to interface with and what shortcomings it would attempt to do away with in those tools it would replace.  For instance, syntax seems very similar to C, but you contrast e# to asm and hardly to C.</p>
<p>I also had a possibly related idea.  I know our company would have many uses for an efficient system to &#8216;port&#8217; MCU code to other languages for simulation.  We have a program to interact with networks of our products and there&#8217;s been some random discussion about online demos of our product.  These environments need to simulate the devices, but the devices would only be represented as objects in the program with much more logic.  A very-high-level language such as e# might be able to generate simulation object code if that sort of need comes up often for most companies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

