Talk:List of ARM Cortex-M development tools

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of ARM Cortex-M development tools. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141030115452/https://imagecraft.com/jumptocortex.html to http://imagecraft.com/jumptocortex.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070114203948/http://kamidake.other-space.com/ to http://www.rtems.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:46, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Prospective changes in the development tools section
ST Micro purchased Atollic True Studio about 2 years ago and made it free for all STM32 development. After a few updated releases of True Studio, they deprecated it in favor of a new Eclipse based IDE package, "STMCubeIDE"; it currently lacks a few of the features of TrueSTUDIO, and the latter is still available for download.

In addition, for software development of on the Microsemi FPGAs with soft and hard Cortex-M and.or RISC-V cores, Microsmi offers their own Eclipse based IDE package called "SoftConsole" (originally from Avaya, then acquired by Actel, which became part of Microsemi, which was purchased by Mircochip. I don't find the press release for the changes in ownership at the moment, so no citation for that.)

I think that both should be added to the list of development tools. Filker0 (talk) 23:35, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Sourcing proposal
I've !voted 'keep' at the AfD where one of the deletion arguments was that the lists are original research and, while I won't consider this article original research (because of substantial overlap of the entries listed with similar lists in the published secondary sources I found), some threshold for referencing in the spirit of Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability/Archive_63 IMO would be useful.

WP:PST mandates that Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and the current practice of referencing vendor websites can give the wrong impression that this requirement can't be met. PaulT2022 (talk) 16:47, 16 January 2024 (UTC)