Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 3rd Nov 2017 14:34 UTC
General Development

In Visual Studio 2017 15.5 Preview 2 we are introducing support for cross compilation targeting ARM microcontrollers. To enable this in the installation choose the Linux development with C++ workload and select the option for Embedded and IoT Development. This adds the ARM GCC cross compilation tools and Make to your installation.

Our cross compilation support uses our Open Folder capabilities so there is no project system involved. We are using the same JSON configuration files from other Open Folder scenarios and have added additional options to support the toolchains introduced here. We hope that this provides flexibility for many styles of embedded development. The best way to get started with this and understand the capabilities is with a project exported from the ARM mbed online compiler. We'll cover the basics here, to learn more about the online compiler see ARM’s tutorials, and you can sign up for an account here.

Thread beginning with comment 650557
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Curious question
by tidux on Sat 4th Nov 2017 04:06 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Curious question"
tidux
Member since:
2011-08-13

The derison was part of the accuracy of the description. They're forfeiting significant performance and in some cases having to drop architectures entirely all because of some irrational fear of the GPLv3.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[4]: Curious question
by Sauron on Sat 4th Nov 2017 07:23 in reply to "RE[3]: Curious question"
Sauron Member since:
2005-08-02

The derison was part of the accuracy of the description. They're forfeiting significant performance and in some cases having to drop architectures entirely all because of some irrational fear of the GPLv3.


Irrational to you perhaps, obviously not to them! And to be fair there is plenty of projects out there that are also keeping clear of GPLv3 and staying with GPLv2. Each to their own.

Reply Parent Score: 1

v RE[4]: Curious question
by Brendan on Sat 4th Nov 2017 09:47 in reply to "RE[3]: Curious question"
RE[5]: Curious question
by tylerdurden on Sat 4th Nov 2017 17:28 in reply to "RE[4]: Curious question"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

You're also behind the times regarding GCC, they've rewritten and update a lot of the toolchain/backend. LOL

Basically they're both now neck to neck. But at the end of the day, gcc still has a bigger library of optimizations. Whereas LLVM is a cleaner/saner base to target a new compiler/language.


What I think it's remarkable how damn good both opensource projects are. They basically put to shame some expensive commercial offerings.

Reply Parent Score: 10

RE[4]: Curious question
by FortranMan on Sun 5th Nov 2017 00:48 in reply to "RE[3]: Curious question"
FortranMan Member since:
2011-12-21

Looks like I've missed much of the conversation here, but the derision I was talking about had nothing to do with objections to licenses and everything to do with using the term 'autistic' as a pejorative. Autism spectrum disorder is a complex, real, and painful phenomenon for those affected by it, and your use of the term is really quite insensitive and borders on hateful. Next time you want to imply that people are acting over fussy about license issues, maybe you should just call them pedantic, or over-zealous.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Curious question
by orfanum on Sun 5th Nov 2017 11:01 in reply to "RE[4]: Curious question"
orfanum Member since:
2006-06-02

I am sorry but I am getting really tired of the thought police. I used to work in social care; there were several changes of terminology while I was employed in that area, each time apparently reflecting a more enlightened view of those I was caring for, assisting, and helping to lead independent lives.

What I noticed was those who had the right attitude to begin with, continued to have the right and respectful attitude. Those that did not possess this faculty did not gain it by being forced to use different terminology.

But this present mania about language means that small, vociferous, self-selecting and solipsistic minorities presume to adjudicate and in the end dictate how others think and can express themselves. There is neither rationality nor objectivity to it.

Calling someone a pedant is also negative, it is just that there is no activist group of agitating, in-group fixating pedants with a political platform and self-selecting agenda to object.

Orf.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Curious question
by Soulbender on Sun 5th Nov 2017 13:28 in reply to "RE[3]: Curious question"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I see that like the Linux community's irrational fear of commercial licences?

Reply Parent Score: 3