Why using ARM Core M and doing an Espressif style? #522
Labels
No labels
bazel
bluetooth
board settings
boot_stage2
bug
build
c++
can't reproduce
clang
clib-interface
cmsis
code cleanliness
code size
compiler version issues
cyw43_driver
debug
discussion
documentation
duplicate
dynamic_clock
elf2uf2
enhancement
errata
filesystem
flash layout
floating point
FreeRTOS
hardware_adc
hardware_claim
hardware_clocks
hardware_dma
hardware_exception
hardware_flash
hardware_gpio
hardware_i2c
hardware_irq
hardware_pio
hardware_pwm
hardware_rcp
hardware_rtc
hardware_spi
hardware_sync
hardware_uart
hardware_vreg
hardware_watchdog
hardware_xosc
help wanted
host
IAR
installation
invalid
linker scripts
lto
lwip
mbedtls
missing API
needs reporter detail
networking
newlib
newlib-multicore
non-c
non-cmake
non-gcc
openocd
orphan PR
OS integration
pico_async_context
pico_base
pico_binary_info
pico_flash
picolibc
pico_lwip
pico_malloc
pico_multicore
pico_printf
pico_runtime
pico_stdio
pico_stdio_usb
pico_sync
pico_time
pico_util
pioasm
port
question
review
review2
rtos interop
runtime init
static library
svd
test
tinyusb
vscode
wifi integration
wontfix
No milestone
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set
Reference
gh-raspberrypi/pico-sdk#522
Loading…
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Can somebody explain, why the Raspberry Pico has an ARM Core M but does not follow the ARM Core M software standards? So the SDK does not implement the benefits of ARM Core M and therefore is not compatible to the ARM Cortex M Eco-System, third parties, etc.? The big advantage of IP in the todays world is you getting hardware and software by the IP vendor - in this case the MCU Core by ARM. So why just using the hardware and the interesting part "Software" is ignored?
So nice SDK, but as soon a product with Pico comes to mass production, I see a lot of costs up-coming, because defined interfaces to third parties, tool suppliers, etc. are not existing. So for everything extra costs are required.
I was very happy to see Raspberry Pi foundation has an own MCU but as soon it came to software I was disappointed.
Thanks for this statement.