On Mon, May 9, 2016, at 10:39 AM, Neil wrote:
> Ha ha... I tinkered with CoIDE last year and also hated it.
>=20
> FWIW, this thread (=20
> http://www.eevblog.com/forum/microcontrollers/st's-(stm32cube)-software-e=
cosystem-is-terrible-how-can-we-fix-it/=20
> ) and others, have me concerned about using Cube.  I do have contact now=
=20
> with an STM FAE who wants me to use Cube, but I'm concerned and thinking=
=20
> I'll use it sparingly/cautiously.

CubeMX is useful, but when you start adding/using the middleware, you
need to do it one module at a time and be prepared for some
testing/debugging. I could say the same for all vendor attempts to
"Harmonize" hardware libraries across their embedded product lines and
not be too wrong. The article you linked to sounds like any number of
forum posts talking about Atmel, Microchip, TI, you name it. So far I
have been happy with STM32 chips performing as they should.

On another note, there's a clone of some of the STM32's. Not exactly a
clone, but their version of the STM32F103 sounds pretty much drop-in
except for debugging/programming:
http://www.gigadevice.com/product-category/1.html

Apparently it is legit. STM32 must be popular enough that it's the 32
bit embedded chip to copy.

> BTW, don't we have an ARM tag for this group?

Oops, you're right. Fixed it :)

Regards, Bob

--=20
http://www.fastmail.com - A no graphics, no pop-ups email service

--=20
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.