I have no idea which framework to use. You have too many. Which one will meet my requirements? (listed in details)

[Hthe .1]

I want to code in C++, at least std=C++14, preferably C++17 or better.

I do not want any drag and drop stuff. Nothing.

I do not want to be forced to use code generators.

I want a framework that other people actually use and write code for.

I want a framework that does not tie me to a particular IDE

I want a framework that preferably does not take a long time to compile, or one where I can remove features/components to shorten compile times

[TDK]

What a weird list of requirements. What do you mean by framework? HAL/LL vs SPL? But that's only 2, and surely 2 isn't "too many".

[Hthe .1]

frameworks being things like MBed, STM32Cube, CMSIS, Arduino* etc. You know, that collection of libraries you use to interface with the device that includes a HAL and the basic components needed to operate the device from software, like (potentially) FreeRTOS, like I said, the HAL, and various components.

* The Arduino framework actually fulfills my requirements but only can target certain STM32 boards like the F303RE 

I don't know why it's so weird. The list of requirements seems pretty vanilla as far as C++ development goes. Every other framework for every other IoT device fulfills these requirements out of the box, because they are just C, and C++ source files, makefiles, and some scripts to glue everything together. Easy peasy.

I want that for STM32 ARMs. That shouldn't be difficult. It's not even a difficult ask.

[TDK]

> frameworks being things like MBed, STM32Cube, CMSIS, Arduino* etc

> Every other framework for every other IoT device fulfills these requirements out of the box

So using Arduino doesn't tie you to a particular IDE? The IDE also has drag/drop.

How exactly does the CMSIS framework satisfy your requirements? It doesn't even compile code.

> they are just C, and C++ source files, makefiles, and some scripts to glue everything together. Easy peasy.

Have you actually tried using STM32CubeIDE? It can be used as just a code compiler. The CubeMX code generation portion is completely optional. Heck, so is HAL/LL. The underlying compiler is GCC which is comparable if not better than everything else out there.

Not looking to argue, just seems like you've built up a preconceived notion of something without actually trying it.

[Tesla DeLorean]

And it should all appear with no cost or effort? Problem is the market and preferences are extremely fractured, if you want something hard enough you can will it into existence, if the rewards are high enough you might be able get others to build it.

O​ne can construct board packages for Arduino, there's even an STM32 related community

[Hthe .1]

Only if you want people to develop on your products. The ESP32s are less expensive, have more features, and have a better software framework. Give me a good reason to use an arm. The only reason I was going to support it is to transfer all of the cross platform graphics library work I've done to the STM32 devices. Since the frameworks don't seem to support basic coding, I guess they won't get my code, nor code from anyone else who doesn't want to deal with this community's silly IDEs and code generator tools.

[Hthe .1]

I've tried using it. I can't make heads or tails of it. Just point me to the documentation on how to use it without the IDE and I'll be happy.

[Pavel A.]

Look at Sysprog's Visual GDB (which uses the old bad Microsoft Visual Studio as IDE).

They support Cmake as build engine, and many cool tricks.