[ECOS] Re: ECOS - MIPS

[Grant Edwards <grante at visi dot com>]

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?

> 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.

> 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"?

> 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.

> 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.

> 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            

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