This is the mail archive of the ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the eCos project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: Re: ECOS - MIPS


I recently had an opportunity to work with eCos. It is a wonderful technology.

Unfortunately, to do anything significant you will need to spend a good amount of time to get familiar with the technology before you can actually start on your own application.

-----Original Message-----
From: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org [mailto:ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org] On Behalf Of K. Sinan YILDIRIM
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2005 9:50 AM
To: Grant Edwards; ecos-discuss@ecos.sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [ECOS] Re: ECOS - MIPS

Cuma 24 Haziran 2005 05:08 ös tarihinde, Grant Edwards şunları yazmıştı: 
> In gmane.os.ecos.general, you wrote:
> > I just mention that eCOS didnt fullfill my needs. The only
> > thing eCOS provides is using reusable components like the ones
> > in visual programming languages.
>
> Huh?  I've no idea what you mean. What are "visual" programming
> languages?  Things like LabVIEW and IBM Data Explorer?
>

- I said visual programming languages. Not tools!  If you say "tools" that 
means you have an idea. This is a contradiction, isn't it ? :P

Some visual programming environments have component based SW development, like 
VB. You drag and drop components, use them, change them. I just wanted to 
mean that eCOS components are ,in mentality, like that. I didn't want to say 
that "eCOS" is bad. An advantage of eCOS is its components. It includes many 
components. Having components is not a bad idea.It is not new also... Isnt it 
? Why do you misunderstand me ? May be your english is not so good... Go and 
take courses. I advice you...


> > If u substract components, uCOS is much more usable than it if
>
> I can't take it any more.  The word is _you_!
>
> > I compare it with eCOS.
>
> That statement puzzles me as well.  I've used both uCOS and
> eCos (and I mean shipped products containing both -- not just
> played with them for an afternoon). They're intended for much
> different markets. You're comparing apples and oranges.
>
> > uCOs is small, deterministic etc...
>
> You probably find it "more usable" simply because it has so
> many fewer available features.  It includes driver models for
> no peripherals, no networking, no filesystem, and only one
> scheduler.  You should be comparing uCOS to just the eCos
> kernel with about half of it's available features removed.
>

- eCOS is much more bigger, it is still groving. There may be many commercial 
products that uses it.  But there are OS'es that do the same  on the embedded 
world ( May be you will misunderstand me again. Let me explain. I mean 
kernel, not components... ). I just wanted to give an example. uCOS is not 
apple and eCOs is not orange. I am not a child that plays operating systems 
on the afternoons. I am not a uCOS fan or an anti-eCOS man. I just tried eCOS 
and saw that it is not really configurable. This is my idea. I wish it 
changes in the future...


> > For example i may write components to uCOS and then it becomes
> > eCOS :P (just a joke...)
>
> OK
>
> > Just examine the books :
> >
> > + Real Time Design Patterns
> > + Patterns for Small Memory Systems
> > + Pattern Oriented SW Architecture ..
> >
> > they are the experiences of embedded SW developers. There are
> > the things that they know much better... I think Operating
> > systems are the products that must live longer. If you want
> > your SW to live longer, you must learn new SW concepts, you
> > must apply them...
>
> So tell us, how many embedded OSes have you written?  How many
> different emebdded SW projects have you shipped?  Did you use
> all those "patterns"?
>
+ I have shipped 1 million embedded products and i have written 1 million 
embedded operating systems. I have been using patterns for a million of 
years.  Patterns doesnt solve everything but it increases reusability. If an 
operating system says  "I am configurable" or " I may be used with many 
projects." it must , at least in the future , use some new SW techniques.

> > For example having an HAL layer as an architecture is not a
> > new concept.
>
> Nobody said it was.  New doesn't not always mean better, and
> old does not always mean worse.

+ Yes. You are really right at that point.

>
> > Unix, Linux and also Windows have HAL layers. Also HAL layer
> > is a must for embedded systems. eCOS is written in C++ . You
> > may use Bridge or Adapter pattern to build an HAL layer.
> > ("Program for interfaces, not for the implementation" is the
> > main concept of modern SW. )
>
> I simply don't see how you think eCos violates that statement.
> The interfaces between eCos and various hardware drivers is
> well defined.
>

+ Yes. You are right too. I just mean that, i think in modern object oriented 
manner and the code and design of eCOS has some design based lacks.

> > There are many operating systems that are done with C++. Have
> > u ever examined them ? For example Chorus, L4, Amobea... etc.
> > They have new ideas,they try to use new SW techniques.
>
> And how many products in the field contain those OSes?
>
> --
> Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  LOOK!!! I'm
> WALKING at               in my SLEEP again!! visi.com

+ You must learn that many contain these OS'es. I know the internals of 
embedded products. I know what sort of bugs they have... Commercially used 
operating systems doesnt meand that they are the best. If eCOS wasnt open 
source or free, how many users will choose eCOS instead of Nucleus, uCOS, QNX 
etc... ? 




-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss


--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]