What are you using...?

[sarang1_in]

What development platform you people are using for PIC micros?

I am planning to go for PICs now. I would prefer C to develop the project. I am using Keil C for 8051 project development and found the IDE to be very user friendly.

I know Nigel, Jay and Kinjal must be using MPLAB assembler only (No chance for C) but still give some openion based on the known C compilers.

I have planned to purchase MPLAB ICD2. Let me know how are the results of it? How about making one by own? What additional features are there in Microchip's ICD2?

Which C compiler is better?

Regards
Sarang

 

[Jay.slovak]

Hi,

I am using MPLAB with Asembly and C18 (powerfull C compiler). ICD2 is working like charm with this IDE setup. If you can get yourself the ICD2 (either buy or make your own), so that you can program/debug all PICs (and don't have to worry whether the PIC is supported)
I recomend you to use the same 8)

Plus Breadboard is handy too.

 

[samcheetah]

this has been discussed before. but anyway C compilers for PICs are expensive! but you can try all of them because they are also available in free trial versions. you can search on google for IAR, CCS and Hitech etc and see which suits you better. microchip's own c18 is a nice option if you are planning to use the 18F series PICs plus there is also a free student version of c18 available on microchip's site. then there is mikroC, a new name, but it is has improved alot since it was released.

so there are alot of choices. some compilers adhere to the ANSI standards and some dont. thats another thing to consider if ANSI compliance matters for you. and some companies have separate compilers for each series of PICs like one for the 16 series PICs and one for the 18 series PICs and they have to be bought separately.

now about the ICD2, well the clones of ICD2 are exact copies of the one made by microchip in terms of functionality. they dont offer something less or more. the only good thing in buying from microchip is that you know its going to work once you turn the power on. but the clones usually dont have much problems.

i hope that helps

 

[Oznog]

I've used both PICC18 and Microchip C18 (more commonly known as MCC18).

I had code with #defines that could compile equally well on MCC18 or PICC18. Both came out about the same length.

The problem was MCC18's interrupt routines came out DEAD slow. It was really bad and I never got a good answer why. I experimented with a bunch of ill-explained context saving options. Some broke the functionality but none made it faster. Frankly I don't understand why they have the manual context saving stuff.

MCC18 has a mandatory differentiation between ROM and RAM pointers. I understand why that makes sense under PIC architecture but they didn't implement strong compiler type checking which makes it a serious hazard.

I have gone with PICC18.

 

[DirtyLude]

I would suggest going with the Zilog Z8 Encore. Their C compiler/Assember/IDE comes with the $40 development kit. No need to buy any 3rd party C compilers.

Or I would go with the AVR and use the GNU tools. Also free.

That is unless you don't live in North America, but it's impossible to tell, if you don't have your location filled out.

 

[Jay.slovak]

I wouldn't abond PICs that easily, you can still get a free C18 Student edition and if you make your own ICD2 it will only cost you ~10$ for everything. (MPLAB+C18+ICD2+DIY developement board)
And don't forget that you can order free samples of all PICs to try them out...

 

[DirtyLude]

I wouldn't abond PICs that easily...

I would; and have.

 

[sarang1_in]

Thanks to all. I am using 16 series PICs to start with. I have prepared a clone of my own.

Well I used AVRs a lot. ( Ofcourse I still use them)

Equally 8051's ( And I love 8051's)

Why I planned PIC is that they have a great variety of microcontrollers suited for almost any application (And the only untouched area for me in 8 bit microcontrollers)

Well Jay, can you give me the link for the DIY development board you're saying about?

 

[samcheetah]

he has made the ICD2 clone by lothar stolz with some modifications. i remember there was a thread in which jay and a couple of other guys discussed about this ICD2 clone and the modifications

**broken link removed**

 

[Jay.slovak]

Yes, we have discussed about my ICD2 . I don't have a dedicated developement board (usually I work on breadboard) but you can either design one yourself (add few LEDs, switches, LEDs, MAX232...) or look at Nigel's tutorials or just google some out...

 

[pittuck]

ok, i should ask for this to be put in the micro sticky:

try boostc!

**broken link removed**

it even works in mplab with ICD2, prices are cheap with upgrades between plans! great support from the actual developers (unlike most languages where u get a hired tech support)...

 

[evandude]

try boostc!

I'll second that. it's literally a small fraction of the cost of many other C compilers for PICs out there... you can use it for free with code size limitation, and for a full license it's only $60... not to mention, the guys who are developing it are extremely fast about fixing stuff and helping you solve problems on their forum...

and it does come with an IDE, that does debugging and stuff, if (like me) you choose not to use MPLAB.

 

[Joel Rainville]

try boostc!

I'll second that. it's literally a small fraction of the cost of many other C compilers for PICs out there... you can use it for free with code size limitation, and for a full license it's only $60... not to mention, the guys who are developing it are extremely fast about fixing stuff and helping you solve problems on their forum...

and it does come with an IDE, that does debugging and stuff, if (like me) you choose not to use MPLAB.

Wow. Now there's a good reason/excuse to try C on the PIC... The need to shell out $60 if I end up liking it is pretty reasonable compared to other compilers's astronomic prices and/or limitations.

 

[evandude]

exactly. And to be honest, I bought myself a professional license for BoostC a couple of months ago, and I have yet to actually use it to unlock the compiler... so far I haven't yet been hampered by the code size limitation of the free version yet.

and if you have a webpage on which you can link to their site, they'll give you a free extra IDE plugins license (at least that's how it is now, i'm sure it's subject to change), which includes the all-important stopwatch feature for checking timing loops and things.

the IDE also allows you to see the generated assembly code during debugging, which is handy at times. ESPECIALLY if you are like me, and practically never use assembly, so if you ever have a very time-critical function to perform, you can write it in C, look at the generated code, and then modify that code and add it in as inline assembly code, rather than remembering enough about assembly to write it from scratch :lol:

 

[pittuck]

yay

converts

**broken link removed**

 

[Joel Rainville]

yay

converts

**broken link removed**

:lol:

The IDE is pretty nice, but more importantly the language is uncluttered and the PIC-specific stuff seems to be very well implemented.

I wouldn't call myself a convert, but I really like what I see so far, and while I might never really jump the fence, I may be caught sitting right in the middle of it. :lol: Like evandude said, using both C and ASM with this IDE/compiler combo seems to be not only feasible, but very practical, effortless and the ideal solution on bigger projects.

Yay 8):lol:

 

[Joel Rainville]

To elaborate a little, what seduced me about BoostC me is the fact that an ASM programmer can look at BoostC code and probably figure it out in no time, because the "behind the scenes" stuff is either implemented as compiler #pragmas (like configuration fuses) or simple library functions, like set_bit() and clear_bit(), which take the same names for parameters as an ASM program (PORTB, TRISB)...

So in theory, if someone posted BoostC code on this forum today, I could probably help him out, even though I only know C programming on different platforms and ASM on the PIC. This isn't the case with other compilers from Microchip and Hi-Tech, for example.

 

[pittuck]

lol

i dont really like their ide, but if they got icd2 working in it, then maybe lol.

But thats probably not gonna happen, so i use it in MPLAB...

 

[Joel Rainville]

lol

i dont really like their ide, but if they got icd2 working in it, then maybe lol.

But thats probably not gonna happen, so i use it in MPLAB...

What is it exactly you don't like about the IDE? I find it quite neat, and the debugger seems to work great.

 

[pittuck]

well, in mplab i click build and it builds, programs and debugs stright away.