What we have been wanting for at least 7 years is...
A PropTool equivalent IDE that runs on Windows, Linux, Mac (as in bst)
A better inbuilt Terminal emulation (bst or better)
Compile time options (#ifdef, etc as in bst and homespun)
Listing (as in bst and/or homespun or similar)
Simple Macros
Source "includes" (as in homespun. Unsure if in bst)
I am sure all these would have consumed far less man hours and $ and seen much wider acceptance/use than has occurred in the IDEs discussed here. Even Roy's OpenSpin isn't getting much use due to poor IDE's.
To the list above, some form of Basic (such as Bean's plus extensions) would I am sure have been extremely popular. Just look at MMBasic on the PIC chips.
On top of all this, we had Ross's Catalina C which worked extremely well. It was never given much support by the powers to be. I can personally attest to it being an excellent product, having used it in a commercial product (on a Propeller with 512KB SRAM and SD mixed with PASM and connected to two other Propellers running a mix of Spin and PASM).
@Cluso99, now you are a bit unfair. Sure PropellerIDE is not as nice as BST, but quite nice already.
so it is - A PropTool equivalent IDE that runs on Windows, Linux, Mac (as in bst)
It does have a inbuild Terminal emulation and even multiple ones open at the same time.
Since PropellerIDE is using Roy's OpenSpin it does support #ifdef, listings and a simple preprocessor, Roy added all of this to OpenSpin already. You also can add additional library path info on the commandline of OpenSpin, not sure what "includes" you are missing, never used homespun.
Brett added subdirectories to object sources, Phil is not too happy about how, but it is there to test it.
So - almost there?
Mike
I am certainly not meaning to be unfair to the developers, particularly for all the time they have invested.
But I am saying...
Neither IDE seems to be ready for prime time.
We don't need the bells and whistles until the basics are complete, stable and usable.
This is 7 years on (10 years from when the Prop was released).
Every time anyone mentions bst as an alternative, its stated that it is unsupported. I would rather use an unsupported working program than one that is supported but doesn't work properly because its a wip.
There has been a dramatic decrease in forum activity over the past 2-3 years. The majority of knowledgeable members are now silent. IMHO this is at least one of the issues.
FYI, here is an example of homespun include...
#include "__MODULE.spin"
It just inserts the lines from the file as though there were within the spin file that included it. So its not an object.
Admittedly, I now prefer C to SPIN, but I would have to agree with some of Cluso99's comments about what was wanted and needed for SPIN, and that would've been a better terminal and a better Prop Tool. IMHO, that should've been the goal for SPIN, and it would have been done a long time ago.
As for SimpleIDE, it was on a good track also, but then everything started to split in too many directions, and I feel there is just too much effort being put into too many different editors and IDEs, which often results in unfinished and unpolished efforts.
What you don't understand about IDE development is that it is very expensive for Parallax. We have to balance funding the ongoing R&D expenditures for almost 11 years now with income generated elsewhere in the business. In a normal system with frequent Propeller product releases we'd easily be able to fund all the IDE work we need.
Even though, we are still taking care of the key feature improvements and bug fixes in SimpleIDE and PropellerIDE as fast as possible.
Developing an IDE from scratch is a BIG job. And I can see the need to build something simple and cross platform for the education market. Their programs don't typically grow all that big so they don't need lots of features.
I've been confused trying to figure out whether SimpleIDE or PropellerIDE or ??? was the blessed path, and I really think Parallax should have blessed one long ago, at least then people can focus on one.
However in the embedded development world there need to be lots of options, though sometimes some tools I've used end up with too many such that they can be horrendous to configure or use. Yes on big platforms like a cell phone I have seen a mix of many languages, C, C++, C#, Pixo, JavaScript and you name it. Amazing that some of them work at all, but that is not the class the Prop falls into.
Projects are needed, but can be simplified with some rules like, header files and source files in the same directory. It is pretty easy to do an automake to chase down all the files given that constraint and a list of include directories. GCC's pre-processor can be used across many languages with some simple tweaks, I use it for BASIC as well as C.
Then you get to the editor. Most IDEs skimp on editor features, so most people will often use their favorite editor for writing the initial program or making big changes. I used Keil for almost 10 years, and to start with its editor was very primitive, but it did evolve and become more sophisticated over time, but as not everything I do is on an embedded platform, I still tend to use my favorite editor in parallel.
I've been confused trying to figure out whether SimpleIDE or PropellerIDE or ??? was the blessed path, and I really think Parallax should have blessed one long ago, at least then people can focus on one.
SimpleIDE is certainly the Parallax-blessed path for C/C++ development. For Spin development, I would guess Prop Tool is still the blessed path based on two facts: A) PropellerIDE is not linked on product pages such as the QuickStart but Prop Tool is, and PropellerIDE's version number is still 0.Y.Z, rather than 1.Y.Z.
SimpleIDE is certainly the Parallax-blessed path for C/C++ development. For Spin development, I would guess Prop Tool is still the blessed path based on two facts: A) PropellerIDE is not linked on product pages such as the QuickStart but Prop Tool is, and PropellerIDE's version number is still 0.Y.Z, rather than 1.Y.Z.
100% correct, David.
We would like PropellerIDE to have an equal blessing as Prop Tool, but we're just not there yet and continue to work towards that goal.
I know it is easy for us to sit in our armchairs and criticise. Hindsight is also wonderful.
But I cannot help to think the opportunity was lost a long time ago by not following up on people such as Brad (bst), Michael (homespun and Sphinx), Ross (Catalina), and others.
I have finally resurrected and modified Sphinx to run under my PropOS, which itself owes a lot to others such as Kye's SD FAT Engine. It will run on any Prop board with an SD card and either serial or 1pin TV And Keyboard. It'!s quite simple to add drivers for VGA, TV, PS2 Keyboard.
Ken, it runs on the little board I sent you a few weeks ago
The nicest feature of the universe is: there are more chances as we can use. So we have to decide, to select and we will make errors in doing so. But: the past is gone, experiences stay and we can do it better next time. Propeller is meant for parallel processing. But still there is no common base to use these features. We have laying around a few PRIME-Boards, I didn't ship them, because there is a lack of documentation and I'm waiting for some other events to happen. SAS software as a service is defined before the term CLOUD was coined. Peters Tachyon show a way how to develop without IDE: just define words and use them. I envision an OS, where processes run all in parallel and an application can hire the processes to reach a given goal. We can create a huge distributed computer by placing props in the internet and making use of the resources. It needs an ignition, an application all can share. We will see, sitting in arm chairs ;-)
I have used PropellerIDE briefly to modify some previous Spin code. Works well. I used it to create and save the EEPROM and BINARY file. Works. I use Propellant DLL to download code to the Propeller. The files created PropellerIDE do not work with the current version of the Propellant DLL. The error message is that the header information is incorrect and is not a legal file.
Comments
But I am saying...
Neither IDE seems to be ready for prime time.
We don't need the bells and whistles until the basics are complete, stable and usable.
This is 7 years on (10 years from when the Prop was released).
Every time anyone mentions bst as an alternative, its stated that it is unsupported. I would rather use an unsupported working program than one that is supported but doesn't work properly because its a wip.
There has been a dramatic decrease in forum activity over the past 2-3 years. The majority of knowledgeable members are now silent. IMHO this is at least one of the issues.
FYI, here is an example of homespun include...
It just inserts the lines from the file as though there were within the spin file that included it. So its not an object.
As for SimpleIDE, it was on a good track also, but then everything started to split in too many directions, and I feel there is just too much effort being put into too many different editors and IDEs, which often results in unfinished and unpolished efforts.
Even though, we are still taking care of the key feature improvements and bug fixes in SimpleIDE and PropellerIDE as fast as possible.
Ken Gracey
I've been confused trying to figure out whether SimpleIDE or PropellerIDE or ??? was the blessed path, and I really think Parallax should have blessed one long ago, at least then people can focus on one.
However in the embedded development world there need to be lots of options, though sometimes some tools I've used end up with too many such that they can be horrendous to configure or use. Yes on big platforms like a cell phone I have seen a mix of many languages, C, C++, C#, Pixo, JavaScript and you name it. Amazing that some of them work at all, but that is not the class the Prop falls into.
Projects are needed, but can be simplified with some rules like, header files and source files in the same directory. It is pretty easy to do an automake to chase down all the files given that constraint and a list of include directories. GCC's pre-processor can be used across many languages with some simple tweaks, I use it for BASIC as well as C.
Then you get to the editor. Most IDEs skimp on editor features, so most people will often use their favorite editor for writing the initial program or making big changes. I used Keil for almost 10 years, and to start with its editor was very primitive, but it did evolve and become more sophisticated over time, but as not everything I do is on an embedded platform, I still tend to use my favorite editor in parallel.
SimpleIDE is certainly the Parallax-blessed path for C/C++ development. For Spin development, I would guess Prop Tool is still the blessed path based on two facts: A) PropellerIDE is not linked on product pages such as the QuickStart but Prop Tool is, and
100% correct, David.
We would like PropellerIDE to have an equal blessing as Prop Tool, but we're just not there yet and continue to work towards that goal.
Ken Gracey
But I cannot help to think the opportunity was lost a long time ago by not following up on people such as Brad (bst), Michael (homespun and Sphinx), Ross (Catalina), and others.
I have finally resurrected and modified Sphinx to run under my PropOS, which itself owes a lot to others such as Kye's SD FAT Engine. It will run on any Prop board with an SD card and either serial or 1pin TV And Keyboard. It'!s quite simple to add drivers for VGA, TV, PS2 Keyboard.
Ken, it runs on the little board I sent you a few weeks ago
Just a heads up.