OPENCORES.ORG

IMHO:

Although not directly related to t51, but may prove useful
http://www.xilinx.com/bvdocs/userguides/ug129.pdf
http://www.xilinx.com/bvdocs/appnotes/xapp627.pdf
http://www.mediatronix.com/Tools.htm
http://www.xilinx.com/ipcenter/processor_central/picoblaze/picoblaze_user_resources.htm


On 7/27/07, Umair Siddiqui <umairsiddiqui84@g...> wrote:
> IMHO:
>
> Keil 8:
>
> Strength
> • Ideal for rapid code development
> • Cycle-accurate Instruction Set
>   Simulation (ISS)
> • Single-step
> • Breakpoints
> • Intimate interaction with 8052
>   registers, flags, and memory values
> • Code coverage indicator
> • Software timing
> • Basic system-level simulation via file
>   I/O functions
>
> Weakness
> •No modeling of custom logic attached to
>  the 8052 microcontroller
>
> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> ModelSim
>
> Strength
> • Holistic simulation of 8052
>   microcontroller with associated FPGA
>   logic
> • VHDL and Verilog logic and timing
>   simulation
> • Cycle and timing accurate with FPGA
>   hardware
>
> Weakness
> • Requires simulator setup and stimulus
>   files
> • Digital simulator, not an ideal Instruction
>   Set Simulation environment
> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> In-system on FPGA
>
> Strength
> • Fast, real-time performance
> • Ideal for complex interactions
> • Integrated with peripherals, displays,
>   UARTs, etc.
>
> Weakness
> • Poor visibility of register contents
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 7/27/07, wei.wang@p... <wei.wang@p...> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > If I use keil 51 vision 8 to simulate, which target device(8052) is more
> > compatible with t51 source code? The compile and simuation result is
> > independent on target device ,isn't it? (Different 8052 target device has
> > different instruction cycle)
> >
> > Who can help me? Thanks in advance!
> >
> > wwang
> > _______________________________________________
> > http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores
> >
>