Compilers for the PIC
Links
Email discussion
Date: 19971111
From: Marcelo Rib <marcelor@guttenberg.correionet.com.br>
To: pics@parallaxinc.com
Subject: [PICS] C compiler
What's the best choice in c compiler?
-regards
-marcelor@correionet.com.br
Date: 19971111
From: bobs@pmdinc.com (Bob Shaver)
To: "pics@parallaxinc.com" <pics@parallaxinc.com>
Subject: RE: [PICS] C compiler
Anti-flame request: the following opinions are based partially on old information (and is so noted).
Try CC5x from B. Knudsen Data (in Norway, contact dag.bakken@microchip.com for information,
also see the MicroChip SPUG area on the MicroChip BBS forums
[also available vie telnet, check MicroChip manuals for info]).
Last I checked (1.5 years ago) it had by far the tightest code output
(and in spite of its name supports all 16C5XX and 6XX parts).
However, it does lack some high-level "C" construct support (like arrays).
CCS was a decent (and getting better) compiler, but buggy
(no flames please, again, I stress this was 1.5 years ago...
CCS was sending out updates every month and each update was significantly better).
The CCS compiler provided routines to support all built-in hardware devices
(serial ports, A/D, etc).
Avoid MPC like the plague unless they have a new version
(old was buggy, incredibly inefficient and generated INVALID assembly code).
I don't know about MPLAB-C (depends on processor, from what I last heard...
17Cxx support was "new" clean rewrite while 16Cxx was still based
on buggy/inefficient MPC compiler).
I spent 2 weeks evaluating the available compilers about 1.5 years ago.
I ran similar code samples through CC5x (full version), CCS (full version),
MPC (OLD!! demo copy) and MPLAB-C (demo copy).
The results are on the SPUG library area on the MicroChip BBS (called COMPILER.TXT I think).
Based on those tests I use the CC5x compiler with MPLAB for simulation and emulator support.
Works great. I don't know about ICEPIC. But if it reads the .COD files all should work.
Date: 19971112
From: Mark Fisher <mfisher@scu.edu.au>
To: pics@parallaxinc.com
Subject: Re: [PICS] C compiler
I have been using the CCS C compiler with PCW IDE. I have an ICEPIC II
emulator. I had no C experience prior to puchasing this compiler.
POSITIVES
It's relatively cheap although you should be prepared to pay for ongoing
maintenance.
PCW has a great "new project" feature which takes all the housekeeping out
of your new project.
It really works and makes me look better than I am!
Much faster than writing assembler. (I'm really asking for it here... Flame
ON Torch!!)
Assistance for valid problems is readily available.
Bugs are addressed and solved in short time by CCS
It works well with ICEPIC
NEGATIVES
Often I will find that the required syntax is not exactly as you might read
in an ANSI C book...a little frustrating when you are trying to learn.
Code is not really transportable across platforms unless you keep well away
from the builtin functions.
The PCW editor is a bit ordinary. (I use the ICEPIC IDE
I have come across a couple of bugs that have cost me a lot of time.
As new bugs are found and fixed, software can be dowmloaded from the CCS
web site...however the 30 day free upgrade is not long enough. I pay the
extra to get 12 mth cover.
Hope this helps
Mark Fisher
ph +61 66 203658
fax +61 66 203880
Date: 19971111
From: Andy KUnz <montana@fast.net>
To: pics@parallaxinc.com
Subject: Re: [PICS] C compiler
I prefer HiTech PIC C.
Andy
Date: 19971111
From: Jack Bonn <jack@swlabs.com>
Organization: Software Design Labs, Inc.
To: pics@parallaxinc.com
Subject: Re: [PICS] C compiler
Marcelo,
Any reason not to include Hi-Tech? Full ANSI C, works great here.
They have a demo version at www.htsoft.com/
Jack Bonn () Software Design Labs, Inc.
jack@swlabs.com (847)526-1337
Date: 19971111
From: Andy Kunz <montana@fast.net>
To: pics@parallaxinc.com
Subject: Re: [PICS] C compiler
I have come across a couple of bugs that have cost me a lot of time.
Boy, CCS did that to me too.
As new bugs are found and fixed, software can be dowmloaded from the CCS
web site...however the 30 day free upgrade is not long enough. I pay the
extra to get 12 mth cover.
You can get 365 different versions that way :-( otherwise you only get
about 30.
My complaint with them was that things that worked in version n were broken
in n+1. Repeatedly. And no documentation that meant anything. And lots
of anti-ANSI things.
Andy
==================================================================
Andy Kunz - Montana Design - 409 S 6th St - Phillipsburg, NJ 08865
Hardware & Software for Industry & R/C Hobbies
"Go fast, turn right, and keep the wet side down!"
==================================================================
