Re: Which PIC18 C Compiler?
From: Mike Page (mike_at_SCRUBeclectic-CAPSweb.BLAMEco.SWENuk)
Date: 07/09/04
- Next message: Norman Rogers: "Hardware Design Engineer Needed"
- Previous message: Edwin Bland: "Re: GNUARM 3.4.1"
- In reply to: Pete Fenelon: "Re: Which PIC18 C Compiler?"
- Next in thread: Michel Catudal: "Re: Which PIC18 C Compiler?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 21:58:20 +0100
Pete Fenelon wrote:
> In comp.arch.embedded Talal Itani <titani@airmail.net> wrote:
>
>>Hello,
>>
>>I currently have an ICD2 from Microchip. I use it to develop PIC16 code
>>using the MPLAB debugger and assembler. I need to move to the PIC18 parts
>>and C language, but I am struggling figure out the development tools to get.
>>Do you have any experience with the CCS compiler running with MPLAB and
>>ICD2? ($175 solution)
>>
>
>
> If you're going for C on the PIC18, the only professional-quality
> solution is the IAR compiler. It's expensive, but you get what you pay
> for. Microchip's compiler lags it significantly on code density and
> quality, and (IMHO) CCS takes too many liberties with the standard to
> actually be called C. It's a C subset with some semantic differences and
> some PIC-specific enhancements. This might not matter to you if you're
> just using it instead of assembler to save the hassle of low-level
> programming, but if you have any interest in migrating C code to/from
> the PIC, IAR is the one and only choice.
>
> pete
I have used Hitech for some years now, and their compilers appear
perfectly decent for PICs.
My experience of IAR products is they're so good you don't notice them;
until you have to justify the cost. It should always be remembered when
comparing products from different economies that exchange rate can be
significant (which is why Swedes come to England for Christmas shopping,
and Brits go to France), as I believe is the case with IAR. If you
really "get what you pay for" that would make GCC a really crap
compiler, which it obviously isn't.
On the issue of reentrancy, the PIC18 like the 8051 has limitations
which shouldn't prevent widespread acceptance but may provoke a little
local difficulty. If the OP doesn't like the architecture, he should
consider something else. AVR and MSP come to mind.
Regards,
Mike.
-- Mike Page BEng(Hons) MIEE www.eclectic-web.co.uk Quiet! Tony's battling the forces of conservatism, whoever we are.
- Next message: Norman Rogers: "Hardware Design Engineer Needed"
- Previous message: Edwin Bland: "Re: GNUARM 3.4.1"
- In reply to: Pete Fenelon: "Re: Which PIC18 C Compiler?"
- Next in thread: Michel Catudal: "Re: Which PIC18 C Compiler?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
