Library Source Code

[nikola]

It's been 7 weeks since my original posting and still no reply... I know you guys are tied up with compiler development, but could you consider your policy here please, and let us know.

Sorry for the delay. We've given it quite a thought as there are both pros and cons with going public. Our plan is to release the source of several libraries soon, and to determine our future course based on the feedback. Please, be patient.

-

[gbh]

Still being patient, some 5 months later...

[gbh]

Still being patient, some 8 months later...

[anton]

Hi gbh,

I think you must just wait a bit more

They said they will release the libraries and make them open-source (soon), maybe they are touching them up and adding comments and want to release all at once

What library are you looking for? I'm sure most of the libraries are not too complicated to write yourself.

Anton

[Steve]

zristic said on the 31st of August...

The conflict is simple: The develompent team wants to publish the sources, but the management does not want to do that.

[westie314]

Hi all,

I just purchased the Pascal for AVR compiler along with the EasyAVR3 board. I'd say that access to the source code for the libraries would be useful, if only to serve as educational material to supplement the manual and example code.

Can anyone from Mikroelectronika comment regarding the availability of library source code in the next release of the Pascal compiler for AVR?

By the way, I'm very pleased so far with the compiler and the EasyAVR3 board...

- Steve

[Isaac]

Above all opinions we should remember than mikroelectronika has made a great job with this compiler and i am very greatful that they released a demo version of it so that we can make programs and taste the quality of this compiler that i like a lot.
I think we should trust in the path tha mikroelectronika would take because we all want that this compiler to grow in librarys and devices support so that the people ho dont have the time or hablity to create their own code can make their work and program easily.
And to make that happen i think mikroelectronika should open some source codes like linux so the world of talented prgrammers can apport code to the compiler, code that would be very usefull, but some parts must still private because is a patented product and comercial.
It would help to get the best of the two parts: public and private code.

[LGR]

Issac - I think that's the idea behind the projects page. The downside is that sorce code has to be language-specific, and they have good reason to not want to maintain libraries in C, Pascal, and Basic. so I think it's either/or. Either it's one of their supported binary libraries, or it's one of our open-source projects. If it's open source, you can only use what's in your language, or have to hand-translate it.

[OddOne]

I'll throw a wrinkle at the management team on this subject:


Embedded devices intended for use in highly secure environments MUST be exposed to review, and the source code for any and all firmware in use MUST be listed completely, including all inclusions and linked modules.


By not releasing library sources mE guarantees that their compilers won't be used by military and government contractors, or anyone that does business with companies that have strong security concerns and protocols in place.

Hey mE management people, you might want to at least make the sources available as a by-request-only thing for those of us that deal with security.

oO

[LGR]

I don't think they want that market. That's what you use a $5000 compiler for. This isn't suitable for military or medical or aerospace or other mission-critical applications. If you want to do that, go find someone who explicitly supports mission-critical applications.

[gbh]

Sorry for the delay. We've given it quite a thought as there are both pros and cons with going public. Our plan is to release the source of several libraries soon, and to determine our future course based on the feedback. Please, be patient.-

Is it really 3 years since I asked for the mP library source to be published?... I guess the answer was [an unpublished] no.

Anyway - as it turns out I couldn't use the mikroElektronika compiler or libraries in my project for exactly the same reason you quote in another thread: support.

I'm now looking to start work on another PIC project - and I have to provide a contractual level of support on the products I design. And to do that I need either:

i) a back-to-back support agreement with the mikroElektronika to fix bugs in the libraries on a more than best-endeavour basis (which to my knowledge they don't offer) or
ii) access to the source for any library units I compile into a project (which again they have seemingly decided not to offer) so that I may fully support the code myself if need be.

Unfortunately, as such, this is likely to be only a fleeting visit back to the forum - after an absence of almost 2 years - as I simply can't use your development kit(s) for anything more than to lash up a quick proof of concept. It's disappointing as you have some great products on offer here.

Note: It's not like myself and others were asking for the source to the compiler!

[LGR]

I don't think they have the staff to do that level of support, but possibly third-parties (perhaps distributors like xor) can provide that kind of support for a price. Then, mE would make the source available to the third-party, and they would have a way to get to the bottom of problems, even if the problems are bugs in the libraries.

That would depend on a number of things, (such as how much demand there would be for such a service), but it might solve the dilemma.

[gbh]

I don't think they have the staff to do that level of support

I wasn't suggesting they did - and I wasn't even proposing that they consider it. The point I was trying to make (though in a rather wordy way) is that opening up the source to the libraries (which all the major compiler companies do) could actually reduce the support effort required by mE, rather than (as they suggest in another post) increase it.

Re. opening it up to 3rd parties only - that's not going to fly. I mean - they'd have to understand both my code and the library code and effectively undertake any fault-finding on my behalf. And it adds cost and complexity to the process. Not really a commercially realistic proposition.

There's no dilemma - as I said my workaround will be to limit any use of mE's kit to developing quick lash-ups, and turning to more professional tools to code a commercial product.

Pity though - I don't think mE realises that this policy decision is limiting the market for their products.

[janni]

Pity though - I don't think mE realises that this policy decision is limiting the market for their products.

As LGR said: "I don't think they want that market." Not yet.

mE has decided on evolution path that allows them quickly develop full-featured compilers - unfortunaltely without much regard for optimum and bug-free code (sorry guys ). This approach is apparently successful, whatever the stress it gives more demanding customers.

Time for clearing the libraries of bugs and imperfections will follow (as it is already observable with the compilers and IDE) and only then one may expect source code release (not necessarily for free, though).

The only danger mE may face is that somebody will indeed start selling foolprof libs for their compilers before they reach this stage (there are some people that use mE's compilers for serious work).

[LGR]

Janni - I can't say anything more specific, but look for a new compiler for a new chip (not Microchip or AVR) in the coming weeks. Before the house cleaning on libraries happens, I think we're going to see some more silicon supported.