next topic »

[Reply #15 on:]

Just another update.



I've been battling with the output of gmake under cygwin, apparently the processEasy function that gmake uses to execute commands (like avr-gcc) have some bugs under cygwin and i can't get the correct output from gmake.

for now i'am using a similar compile as the Java IDE the main difference is:

1 - made an external console application
2 - the external application uses a configuration file with a syntax similar to variable declaration in makefiles...

What i've been doing

1 - Plugin system to allow external assemblies loaded into the Editor
2 - Plugins can execute commands from other plugins
3 - Menus and toolbars configurable with XML files (can execute commands from plugins, etc)
4 - Compile and upload process
5 - Browser window to allow a "start page" and load web pages (help and stuff)

The five points that i mentioned are not all 100% but the are all > 80% done

with does 5 tasks completed i will release a 1 version to download

Then i will work into

. sketchs with pde files (like the original editor. now they are only cpp based)
. intellisence
. syntax highlight


also i have a couple of questions to the community:

1 - I have planed to allow .net code do be written in the editor and allow an easy integration with the hardware. what do you think?
2 - I've thinking of releasing the project in google code or code plex. where to put it?
3 - there are a growing number of similar projects in the forum and i've started to think if we really need an new Editor/IDE. what do you think?

Thanks!

[Reply #16 on:]

i think that for step-through debugging i have some problems:

  1 - i may try and use an integration with gdb/Simulavr - i think Simulavr is outdated and updating it is not simple... (gdb with an emulator?)  
  2 - writing a simulator from scratch is a very hard work...
  3 - Integration with the simulator in avr-studio? i don't know if the sdk from Atmel allows this... maybe i can try an contact Atmel on the subject and see if I can get any response...

Curs0r you might want to check out David Etherton's  AVR Mega644 emulator at the uzebox project. Dave wrote it to be AVR instruction clock accurate to display the uzebox's video output.

[Reply #17 on:]

Curs0r you might want to check out David Etherton's AVR Mega644 emulator at the uzebox project. Dave wrote it to be AVR instruction clock accurate to display the uzebox's video output.

Thanks TonyD I will look into this.  

[edit]There is a lot good work put into the Uzebox Emulator by David Etherton. I will try and compile the AVR part in VS in the weekend... [/edit]

[Reply #18 on:]

Man - i totally forgot about this project.. and the way it looks i can give up my small idea of an IDE.. there dont need to be more than one Ide that look the same, especially when one looks better and seems to work much better than the other.

With other words: I like the shown IDE here already more than my piece of code i wrote for a few days ;0)

*edit*
One suggestion maybe.. while i was writing my small IDE i had one particular feature in mind, that would be something for you as well.. how about a panel that shows you the functions in the current viewn CPP file? I found that one in VS6 quite handy and used it all the time (it has shown the various class' functions, consts and variables and when doubleclicked brought you right at the declaration point)

[Reply #19 on:]

When will you release the code? The IDE looks really great!

Put it on google code, it is a good way to go.

I offer my help, I am an experienced .NET developer and I am not happy with the current Java-based IDE (see my modifications for LumiNet).

We really need a new IDE. Emulation is not important. But it should be compatible... sketches for the original Arduino release must compile on the new IDE.

[Reply #20 on:]

@bohne:

"We really need a new IDE."

What about cross platform ? If users are forced to use the "OS which name I won't utter", I guess the whole Linux/MAC user base will be seriously not amused. Or will you pay for my windows license ?

With that in mind, how about using a framework that is available to all platforms (GTK/Qt/mono) ?

[Reply #21 on:]

Nachtwind:
      i didn't update the thread for some time... its normal to be forgotten...
      I really like your suggestion and i will put it in.

bohne:
        I will release the source code once i'am happy with it. (it's cool so i will release it soon)
      Help is always welcome!
      The sketches from the java IDE dont have a project file so maybe they will have to be converted.
      The philosofy of the java ide is different from this one... and i'm not implementing the PC language parte (processing)... (maybe in the future i will do someting similar but in c# and .net).

[Reply #22 on:]

madworm:

                portability is really an issue. i don't know if it will work under mono... i will run moma on it to see what as to be done. but i'am not to confident... (but is possible)

[Reply #23 on:]

madworm:
Portability of .Net projects is often doable although i think the project should be brought to a release first so that someone (or a team) might get the job of monoporting it (since, unfortunately, though having a great goal, the mono people simply didnt the trick right that was lying before them...)
In the end i also think that a new IDE is important, but i dont think this should succeed the official IDE but it should be a well known (windows) alternative until ported ;0)

[Reply #24 on:]

Some guys are happy with the origignal IDE, others use emacs, others use Eclipse... now a group of users wants to use a .NET-based IDE... I don't see any problems. Nobody is forced to use the new IDE.

[Reply #25 on:]

Last Update Sketch Editor v0.4.0015 alfa



This is the last post before the first binary release.
I will upload a binary release in the next few days and enter a small bug report/fix period before i will release the source in Google code
(within 1 or 2 weeks time).

Sorry about the delay...

[Reply #26 on:]

3 - there are a growing number of similar projects in the forum and i've started to think if we really need an new Editor/IDE. what do you think?

[Reply #27 on:]

3 - there are a growing number of similar projects in the forum and i've started to think if we really need an new Editor/IDE. what do you think?

[Reply #28 on:]

would realy love to have something like used in the .net enviroment  

please keep us posted, especially once we can beta-test it  

[Reply #29 on:]

I'd really much rather see ways of getting the arduino code to get compiled/download from "standard" APIs (say, by implementing a command-line version of the app that has "compile" and "upload" options) than to have yet another "complete IDE."  (Put another way, I really want the "editor" to be separate from "everything else", so I can use my favorite editor with lots of different target CPUs...)