Re: Which PIC18 C Compiler?

From: TP (name_at_usenet.com)
Date: 07/11/04

  • Next message: Grzegorz Mazur: "Re: Basic logic problem"
    Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 13:01:15 -0500
    
    

    On 8 Jul 2004 22:32:36 -0700, tronnort@yahoo.com (David L. Jones)
    wrote:

    >"Talal Itani" <titani@airmail.net> wrote in message news:<cckb50$cl9@library2.airnews.net>...
    >> 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)
    >>
    >> Thanks,
    >> Talal
    >
    >I don't have experience with the 18 series compilers, but for the 16
    >series the HiTech ones beats the pants off the CCS compiler, much more
    >professional. At the time I needed to do floats in printf() and the
    >CCS compiler wouldn't do it.
    >The HiTech compiler also sensibly uses the acutal register names as
    >used in the datasheet, so you can simply go PORTA=123 etc. I would
    >avoid any compiler which doesn't allow this as standard.
    >
    >The 18 series HiTech compiler uses their new HiTide windows interface.
    >Gotta be better than the DOS version on the 16 series compiler.
    >Although I now integrate the PIC-C compiler with the MPLAB program,
    >it's painless.
    >
    >If you can afford it, go for the HiTech compiler. Although the CCS one
    >will probably do you just fine if you are on a budget.
    >
    >Dave :)

    I've used both HiTech and CCS compilers and prefer the CCS. The
    main reason is that at the time HiTech operated in a DOS window and
    you could only see something like 14 lines of code at a time and long
    comments would extend past the limits of the DOS window. I am using
    CCS now with both 16 and 18 series PIC microcontrollers with no
    problems. The issue of CCS not using the actual register names
    is a disappointment but is remedied by creating a header file that
    assigns those names. This is how HiTech does it--you just have to
    provide the file yourself if you use CCS and want to use the register
    names verbatim. I used the HiTech header file as a guide to create
    one for CCS.

    TP


  • Next message: Grzegorz Mazur: "Re: Basic logic problem"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Which PIC18 C Compiler?
      ... >> using the MPLAB debugger and assembler. ... >series the HiTech ones beats the pants off the CCS compiler, ...
      (sci.electronics.design)
    • Re: Which PIC18 C Compiler?
      ... >>series the HiTech ones beats the pants off the CCS compiler, ... >>CCS compiler wouldn't do it. ... I used the HiTech header file as a guide to create ...
      (sci.electronics.design)
    • Re: Choosing between Microchips C18 compiler or the CCS compiler
      ... CCS isn't in the same league as HiTech. ... > compiler or the CCS compiler. ... > on the web from one developer. ...
      (comp.arch.embedded)
    • problem w using Compiler for MPLAB
      ... I have installed successfully MPLAB 7.11 and Hitech C Compiler v8.53 ...
      (comp.arch.embedded)
    • Re: C Compiler comparison for PIC18?
      ... >> I've done commercial products using the CCS PCH compiler. ... >> some projects to C18 to see how it stacks up. ... >problem where high ISRs corrupt some registers on exit from the high ISR ...
      (comp.arch.embedded)