4 ms·
> Cypress PSoC Creator, Maxim DARWIN 0/10 Ha. I inherited a project that used a PSoC module and had to set up and keep a Windows box around for a year until I
by ohazi 6y ago
> Cypress PSoC Creator, Maxim DARWIN 0/10
Ha.
I inherited a project that used a PSoC module and had to set up and keep a Windows box around for a year until I could get that damned thing designed out of the next revision (replaced with a Nordic).
Everything has to be done in a buggy, bloated, custom GUI tool, even configuring peripherals, even flashing. Nothing is scriptable. Their chip might have been perfectly fine, but working with their software was torture. They treat their customers like idiots -- you have to pull teeth to get something as basic as a memory map so that you can fix things when they inevitably don't work.
Completely agree with the 0/10 assessment. I'd sooner quit my job than use one of these chips again.
Edit: Another comment suggests that Cypress has a new, less insane software tool now, that's cross platform and can work with Makefiles. shrug
- duskwuff 6y agoThe PSoC hardware isn't fully documented, either. Some critical parts of the UDB architecture (which is arguably the most interesting part of the product!) aren't explained in the register documentation -- for example, the registers which control routing are described as "RAM configuration bytes for channel", with no further explanation. If you're using Cypress's IDE, it can generate the required configuration data for you. But if you want to take off on your own, you're out of luck.
- lmilcin 6y agoI keep my toolchains for embedded development on Linux VMs. Basically: one project === one VM. I know I cane bring it up after couple of years and be able to fix a bug or add a feature.