??? 12/21/06 15:14 Read: times |
#129904 - I don't care how it is called... Responding to: ???'s previous message |
... as long as it is clear what it is.
Regardless of whether it is useful or not, I see a significant difference between the "classical" ICE (where trace is possible or available), and serially-communicating debugger with on-chip support (which is where the SiLabs etc. fall), where a possibility for trace is limited or nil (there are also other nuances in which these two solutions differ, all of them important maybe in 1.23765% of cases). I have no problem calling the latter "ICE" as long as there is some proper "extension" to the term "ICE", either for the former, or the latter, unambiguously differentiating the two. I also see no problem calling a monitor-based solution "ICE", again as long as there is some indication that this is a completely different stuff than the previously mentioned two. And I see no problem with establishing the terminology here, at this forum. Any thoughts? JW PS I can't find the thread dealing with + and - of each of these debugging tools, please help |