Hi Guru's, I have been handed a PIC18 project including a CCS compiler. I have been struggling for days now to try to work around something that seems to be a compiler bug but CCS have not been very helpful to solve this project. To be honest, this whole CCS thing seems to be targeted at embedded-challenged people and many pre-cooked things and the almost impossibility to devide a project in several C files are getting seriously in the way of an experienced developer..... I am now considering buying a decent C compiler and I'd like to have some opinions of you guys. I am opting between IAR, Hi-Tech and SourceBoost. Any comments and/or suggestions? Regards, Meindert
PIC18 compiler
Started by ●May 31, 2010
Reply by ●May 31, 20102010-05-31
On May 31, 7:07=A0am, "Meindert Sprang" <m...@NOJUNKcustomORSPAMware.nl> wrote:> I am now considering buying a decent C compiler and I'd like to have some > opinions of you guys. I am opting between IAR, Hi-Tech and SourceBoost. A=ny> comments and/or suggestions?Well, firstly - the architecture sucks (for smaller devices) so don't expect any compiler to be wart-free. I use CCS's tiny tiny software for a couple of designs that should be written in asm but need to be supported by people who only speak C, and it's about as painful/ painless as I would expect for a compiler for such a horrifyingly dismal core. Having said all this random nonsense, I'd vote for Hi-Tech. Partly because we use them at work and they are at least approachable for support. But mainly because Microchip owns them now, and I would expect they will be the most up to date looking forward.
Reply by ●May 31, 20102010-05-31
Meindert Sprang wrote:> I am now considering buying a decent C compiler and I'd like to have some > opinions of you guys. I am opting between IAR, Hi-Tech and SourceBoost. > Any comments and/or suggestions?Sourceboost is cheap. A client uses it for their products and they have no complaints. The only non-standard aspect I've run into is that sizeof is implemented as though it were a function, so parentheses are required always. I actually got them into SourceBoost when another consultant moved on and left them compilerless. For $150 we could keep on developing while we reviewed their options. Mel.
Reply by ●May 31, 20102010-05-31
In message <4c0398f8$0$22933$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>, Meindert Sprang <ms@NOJUNKcustomORSPAMware.nl> writes>Hi Guru's, > >I have been handed a PIC18 project including a CCS compiler. I have been >struggling for days now to try to work around something that seems to be a >compiler bug but CCS have not been very helpful to solve this project. To be >honest, this whole CCS thing seems to be targeted at embedded-challenged >people and many pre-cooked things and the almost impossibility to devide a >project in several C files are getting seriously in the way of an >experienced developer..... > >I am now considering buying a decent C compiler and I'd like to have some >opinions of you guys. I am opting between IAR, Hi-Tech and SourceBoost. Any >comments and/or suggestions?It depends on the project. Hi-Tech went bust and were bought by Microchip. Their compilers were not bad but not brilliant either. IAR are expensive but a very good compiler. There are few professional standard tools for the PIC18 other than the IAR because of the problems over the PIC16. So it depends on the nature of the project. If there is any safety or high reliability involved IAR. If it is a consumer or low cost type device Hi-Tech should suffice. Microchip can not afford to let these compilers sink. I have no idea about the SourceBoost -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Reply by ●May 31, 20102010-05-31
On 5/31/2010 11:36 AM, Chris H wrote:> In message<4c0398f8$0$22933$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>, Meindert Sprang > <ms@NOJUNKcustomORSPAMware.nl> writes >> Hi Guru's, >> >> I have been handed a PIC18 project including a CCS compiler. I have been >> struggling for days now to try to work around something that seems to be a >> compiler bug but CCS have not been very helpful to solve this project. To be >> honest, this whole CCS thing seems to be targeted at embedded-challenged >> people and many pre-cooked things and the almost impossibility to devide a >> project in several C files are getting seriously in the way of an >> experienced developer..... >> >> I am now considering buying a decent C compiler and I'd like to have some >> opinions of you guys. I am opting between IAR, Hi-Tech and SourceBoost. Any >> comments and/or suggestions? > > It depends on the project. > > Hi-Tech went bust and were bought by Microchip. Their compilers were not > bad but not brilliant either. > > IAR are expensive but a very good compiler. > > There are few professional standard tools for the PIC18 other than the > IAR because of the problems over the PIC16. So it depends on the nature > of the project. If there is any safety or high reliability involved IAR. > > If it is a consumer or low cost type device Hi-Tech should suffice. > Microchip can not afford to let these compilers sink. > > I have no idea about the SourceBoost > >I did not know Hi-tech when Bust. They actual where better before Microchip bought them. Faster updates and bug fixes. It is not a cheap compiler, but it has a free and eval version. I use the older ones with no problems. I am using the New Lite version as a test on a new program. So far so good.
Reply by ●May 31, 20102010-05-31
On Mon, 31 May 2010 12:45:11 -0400, Neil <NeilKurzm@worldnet.att.net> wrote:>On 5/31/2010 11:36 AM, Chris H wrote: >> Hi-Tech went bust and were bought by Microchip.---snip--->I did not know Hi-tech when Bust.They didn't. -- Dan Henry
Reply by ●May 31, 20102010-05-31
Dan Henry wrote:> On Mon, 31 May 2010 12:45:11 -0400, Neil <NeilKurzm@worldnet.att.net> > wrote: > >> On 5/31/2010 11:36 AM, Chris H wrote: >>> Hi-Tech went bust and were bought by Microchip. > > ---snip--- > >> I did not know Hi-tech when Bust. > > They didn't.I thought they simply got an offer they couldn't refuse. Cheers Don... -- Don McKenzie Site Map: http://www.dontronics.com/sitemap E-Mail Contact Page: http://www.dontronics.com/email Web Camera Page: http://www.dontronics.com/webcam No More Damn Spam: http://www.dontronics.com/spam These products will reduce in price by 5% every month: http://www.dontronics-shop.com/minus-5-every-month.html
Reply by ●May 31, 20102010-05-31
On 2010-05-31, Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote:> In message <4c0398f8$0$22933$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>, Meindert Sprang ><ms@NOJUNKcustomORSPAMware.nl> writes>>I have been handed a PIC18 project including a CCS compiler. I have been >>struggling for days now to try to work around something that seems to be a >>compiler bug but CCS have not been very helpful to solve this project. To be >>honest, this whole CCS thing seems to be targeted at embedded-challenged >>people and many pre-cooked things and the almost impossibility to devide a >>project in several C files are getting seriously in the way of an >>experienced developer.....> IAR are expensive but a very good compiler.What do you mean by "very good"? The last time I evaluated IAR for the PIC18, it generated code that was 50% larger than Hi-Tech (~36K vs ~24K). It was so large that I wasn't able to see if the code actually worked, because it was too large for the 32K target processor. -- John W. Temples, III
Reply by ●May 31, 20102010-05-31
On 1 June, 00:04, John Temples <use...@xargs-spam.com> wrote:> On 2010-05-31, Chris H <ch...@phaedsys.org> wrote: > > > In message <4c0398f8$0$22933$e4fe5...@news.xs4all.nl>, Meindert Sprang > ><m...@NOJUNKcustomORSPAMware.nl> writes > >>I have been handed a PIC18 project including a CCS compiler. I have bee=n> >>struggling for days now to try to work around something that seems to b=e a> >>compiler bug but CCS have not been very helpful to solve this project. =To be> >>honest, this whole CCS thing seems to be targeted at embedded-challenge=d> >>people and many pre-cooked things and the almost impossibility to devid=e a> >>project in several C files are getting seriously in the way of an > >>experienced developer..... > > IAR are expensive but a very good compiler. > > What do you mean by "very good"? =A0The last time I evaluated IAR for > the PIC18, it generated code that was 50% larger than Hi-Tech (~36K vs > ~24K). =A0It was so large that I wasn't able to see if the code actually > worked, because it was too large for the 32K target processor. > > -- > John W. Temples, IIII use the Microchip C18 compiler for PIC18 and have had relatively few problems.
Reply by ●May 31, 20102010-05-31
On Mon, 31 May 2010 13:07:23 +0200, Meindert Sprang wrote:> Hi Guru's, > > I have been handed a PIC18 project including a CCS compiler. I have been > struggling for days now to try to work around something that seems to be > a compiler bug but CCS have not been very helpful to solve this project. > To be honest, this whole CCS thing seems to be targeted at > embedded-challenged people and many pre-cooked things and the almost > impossibility to devide a project in several C files are getting > seriously in the way of an experienced developer..... > > I am now considering buying a decent C compiler and I'd like to have > some opinions of you guys. I am opting between IAR, Hi-Tech and > SourceBoost. Any comments and/or suggestions? > > Regards, > MeindertI have used the free Microchip compiler for several projects. So far I have not come across any major warts except that out of the box the libraries are compiled for large memory support (24 bit pointers). First thing I did was recompile for small memory. You have to remember it is a Harvard architecture and constants stored in flash cannot be accessed as normal memory. The compiler will take care of part of this. For the memcpy, strcpy type library routines you have to remember what memory the source and destination reside in, and use the proper library routines. -- Joe Chisolm Marble Falls, Tx.
