Post by thread:[OT] CCS IDE Annoyance. Any ideas?

On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 8:31 AM, solarwind <.....x.solarwind.xKILLspam.....gmail.com> wrote: > And by the way, it's not called "ShowMessagebox()" because the code is > protected and there are no names/debugging symbols. Also, the function > would probably take some arguments. > That's correct, however, you could find out which function is calling the MessageBoxA Windows API (from USER32.DLL). There are few very well written disassemblers for that. Probably one of the most powerful one is the IDA Pro. However, I doubt if that is the correct (and definitely not legal) way, I mean it should have been done without cracking the software for sure. Tamas -- Rudonix DoubleSaver http://www.rudonix.com

I'm not sure whether you are aware of this or not, but the CCS compiler interfaces seamlessly with MPLAB. You don't really even notice that its there and while there is a quick splashscreen when it compiles it is only on for a fraction of a second. The MPLAB debugger also works extremely well with C. You do have to download a software shim from the CCS site, but they work and play together very well. On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 12:28 PM, solarwind <x.solarwind.xspam_OUTgmail.com> wrote: > It also takes hours for me to crack something - I'm not a > professional, lol. Is there some config file or option in the IDE or > something? > -

On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 3:48 PM, John Hansen <@spam@johnKILLspamhansen.net> wrote: > I'm not sure whether you are aware of this or not, but the CCS compiler > interfaces seamlessly with MPLAB. You don't really even notice that its > there and while there is a quick splashscreen when it compiles it is only on > for a fraction of a second. The MPLAB debugger also works extremely well > with C. You do have to download a software shim from the CCS site, but they > work and play together very well. Even the project wizard works with MPLAB? I'm still new to the way CCS does things and I rely on the project wizard to set up my project for me.

There is indeed a project wizard in MPLAB. I'm not sure it's identical to the CCS IDE, but it allows you to specify the type of PIC, specify where to put the project, give it a name and add existing files to it. I started out with CCS when I started with PICs about 10 years ago and found it to be quite easy to use. I've never really understood why people pay extra for the CCS IDE when the integration with MPLAB is so good. There was some justification for it 10 years ago when MPLAB was a lot less polished, but not any more. On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 3:58 PM, solarwind <KILLspamx.solarwind.xKILLspamgmail.com> wrote: {Quote hidden}> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 3:48 PM, John Hansen <RemoveMEjohnTakeThisOuThansen.net> wrote: > > I'm not sure whether you are aware of this or not, but the CCS compiler > > interfaces seamlessly with MPLAB. You don't really even notice that its > > there and while there is a quick splashscreen when it compiles it is only > on > > for a fraction of a second. The MPLAB debugger also works extremely well > > with C. You do have to download a software shim from the CCS site, but > they > > work and play together very well. > > Even the project wizard works with MPLAB? I'm still new to the way CCS > does things and I rely on the project wizard to set up my project for > me. > > -

On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 5:07 PM, John Hansen <spamBeGonejohnspamBeGonehansen.net> wrote: > There is indeed a project wizard in MPLAB. I'm not sure it's identical to > the CCS IDE, but it allows you to specify the type of PIC, specify where to > put the project, give it a name and add existing files to it. > > I started out with CCS when I started with PICs about 10 years ago and found > it to be quite easy to use. I've never really understood why people pay > extra for the CCS IDE when the integration with MPLAB is so good. There was > some justification for it 10 years ago when MPLAB was a lot less polished, > but not any more. Just tested it. It has the MPLAB standard project wizard, not the CCS wizard which lets you select all the different options.

On Sat, 7 Mar 2009 22:30:28 -0500, solarwind wrote: > Whenever I use the CCS C compiler's IDE and hit the build button for my > project, that stupid popup window comes up and stays there a few seconds > after the compile process is done, just to show the RAM and ROM usage, > even though it is printed out to the status text box. It's really > annoying. Is there any way to get rid of it or to make it stay for a > shorter period of time? I held off answering until I had time to actually check this... Yes, there is an option in Options | Project Options | Output Files dialog box. "Compile Window Up" lets you choose how long to display the compile window for both a "No Errors" and "On Error" result of your build/compile. I actually like it to be displayed as it gives me a snapshot of the PIC resources my code is using. Matt Pobursky Maximum Performance Systems

On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Matt Pobursky <TakeThisOuTpiclistEraseMEspam_OUTmps-design.com> wrote: {Quote hidden}> On Sat, 7 Mar 2009 22:30:28 -0500, solarwind wrote: >> Whenever I use the CCS C compiler's IDE and hit the build button for my >> project, that stupid popup window comes up and stays there a few seconds >> after the compile process is done, just to show the RAM and ROM usage, >> even though it is printed out to the status text box. It's really >> annoying. Is there any way to get rid of it or to make it stay for a >> shorter period of time? > > I held off answering until I had time to actually check this... > > Yes, there is an option in Options | Project Options | Output Files dialog > box. > > "Compile Window Up" lets you choose how long to display the compile window > for both a "No Errors" and "On Error" result of your build/compile. > > I actually like it to be displayed as it gives me a snapshot of the PIC > resources my code is using. > > Matt Pobursky > Maximum Performance Systems Thanks so much!

On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 17:07:37 -0500, John Hansen wrote: > There is indeed a project wizard in MPLAB. I'm not sure it's identical > to the CCS IDE, but it allows you to specify the type of PIC, specify > where to put the project, give it a name and add existing files to it. > > I started out with CCS when I started with PICs about 10 years ago and > found it to be quite easy to use. I've never really understood why > people pay extra for the CCS IDE when the integration with MPLAB is so > good. There was some justification for it 10 years ago when MPLAB was a > lot less polished, but not any more. I guess it depends what you consider highly integrated and polished. I still find the source level debugging in CCS much better with CCS than MPLAB. We probably spend 75% or more of our time in the debugger working on real hardware so it is a pretty big deal to us. I also use the CCS ICD-U40 for hardware debugging. I think it's much better than the ICD2 and of course it works seamlessly with the CCS debugger. It's inexpensive enough ($75) and has a (free) standalone programming application that I supply it to all my customers and use it regularly for production line programming. The CCS IDE also has a lot of nice extras like integrated help with CCS C and built-in library functions, PIC on-chip peripherals and probably a few other things I can't remember right now. The cost difference between the command line and IDE version is so minimal considering you are getting an excellent debugger that I will gladly pay for it. It only represents a few hours of my engineering time once a year to maintain it. To me, that's pretty inexpensive. Matt Pobursky Maximum Performance Systems

Rikard Bosnjakovic wrote: > On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 23:49, solarwind <RemoveMEx.solarwind.xspam_OUTKILLspamgmail.com> wrote: > >> Any professional IDE needs code completion. > > Why? > > I have been programming for 20+ years and have never used, or had a > need for, code completion. If someone programs in the same framework (or in no framework) for 20+ years, the usefulness of code completion is probably not that big. But even then, if you've never used it, you can't really judge whether you'd find it useful once you got used to it. If you switch languages, frameworks and third-party libraries frequently -- frameworks and libraries can easily add up to thousands of functions or thousands of classes with tens of thousands of members --, then code completion comes quite handy. No normal person can memorize all that as quickly as would be needed. Also when you're working on team projects with that same amount of internal classes, having the possible prototypes of a function or the members of a class just pop up when you're writing the name comes extremely handy. In a similar vein, hovering over a variable and see its type is similarly handy. Related to that are "jump to declaration" and "jump to definition" functionalities. Gerhard

Gerhard Fiedler wrote: {Quote hidden}>>> Any professional IDE needs code completion. >> >> Why? >> >> I have been programming for 20+ years and have never used, or had a >> need for, code completion. > > If someone programs in the same framework (or in no framework) for 20+ > years, the usefulness of code completion is probably not that big. But > even then, if you've never used it, you can't really judge whether you'd > find it useful once you got used to it. > > If you switch languages, frameworks and third-party libraries frequently > -- frameworks and libraries can easily add up to thousands of functions > or thousands of classes with tens of thousands of members --, then code > completion comes quite handy. No normal person can memorize all that as > quickly as would be needed. Also when you're working on team projects > with that same amount of internal classes, having the possible > prototypes of a function or the members of a class just pop up when > you're writing the name comes extremely handy. In a similar vein, > hovering over a variable and see its type is similarly handy. Related to > that are "jump to declaration" and "jump to definition" functionalities. I agree with Gerhard. Often I wish MPLAB's IDE was even more like Delphi's or C#'s IDE. Brooks was right, of course -- there is no silver bullet in software development, but each of the little niceties make programming just a tiny bit easier, and more enjoyable. Vitaliy

I agree with you, Gerhard. I am also programming for more than 20+ years and when I first saw the syntax highlight then I thought that's a stupid thing. Then I realised it is easier to make syntactically correct code with that. Same with the code completion: It just helps to make a code quicker and error free. Mostly I use vim and heavily dependent on Ctrl+P and Ctrl+[ but was also using VisualStudio 6 for a long time and it is nice to just being lazy and start typing something that we do not remember exactly so with code complition it can be figure that out in seconds. That is even better than vim Ctrl+P as it knows members of structures / objects, can tell the function parameters, or display function headers with comments you have made so I found it very useful - except it cannot be switched to vi compatibility mode :-( Tamas On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Gerhard Fiedler <RemoveMElistsTakeThisOuTspamconnectionbrazil.com {Quote hidden}> wrote: > Rikard Bosnjakovic wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 23:49, solarwind <EraseMEx.solarwind.xspamspamBeGonegmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Any professional IDE needs code completion. > > > > Why? > > > > I have been programming for 20+ years and have never used, or had a > > need for, code completion. > > If someone programs in the same framework (or in no framework) for 20+ > years, the usefulness of code completion is probably not that big. But > even then, if you've never used it, you can't really judge whether you'd > find it useful once you got used to it. > > If you switch languages, frameworks and third-party libraries frequently > -- frameworks and libraries can easily add up to thousands of functions > or thousands of classes with tens of thousands of members --, then code > completion comes quite handy. No normal person can memorize all that as > quickly as would be needed. Also when you're working on team projects > with that same amount of internal classes, having the possible > prototypes of a function or the members of a class just pop up when > you're writing the name comes extremely handy. In a similar vein, > hovering over a variable and see its type is similarly handy. Related to > that are "jump to declaration" and "jump to definition" functionalities. > > Gerhard > -

Tamas Rudnai wrote: > Mostly I use vim and heavily dependent on Ctrl+P and Ctrl+[ but was > also using VisualStudio 6 for a long time and it is nice to just > being lazy and start typing something that we do not remember exactly > so with code complition it can be figure that out in seconds. That is > even better than vim Ctrl+P as it knows members of structures / > objects, can tell the function parameters, or display function > headers with comments you have made so I found it very useful - > except it cannot be switched to vi compatibility mode :-( There are add-ons that allow you to search for occurrences of identifiers that are of the same type. So you can search for the member .id of your struct tRecordA and it won't trigger on member .id of struct tRecordB. An editor that understands the language and its constructs can be much more useful than a general-purpose text tool. Not even regexps can get there. This is not to say that the editor shouldn't be a superb general-purpose text tool. But understanding the language can add much on top of that. Gerhard

I don't understand the logic of saying you've programmed for 20+ years and not used code completion so therefor it's not useful. Maybe you should have tried it in the last 20 years, it's not a godsend but it's certainly not without value. On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Gerhard Fiedler <RemoveMElistsKILLspamconnectionbrazil.com>wrote: {Quote hidden}> Tamas Rudnai wrote: > > > Mostly I use vim and heavily dependent on Ctrl+P and Ctrl+[ but was > > also using VisualStudio 6 for a long time and it is nice to just > > being lazy and start typing something that we do not remember exactly > > so with code complition it can be figure that out in seconds. That is > > even better than vim Ctrl+P as it knows members of structures / > > objects, can tell the function parameters, or display function > > headers with comments you have made so I found it very useful - > > except it cannot be switched to vi compatibility mode :-( > > There are add-ons that allow you to search for occurrences of > identifiers that are of the same type. So you can search for the member > .id of your struct tRecordA and it won't trigger on member .id of struct > tRecordB. > > An editor that understands the language and its constructs can be much > more useful than a general-purpose text tool. Not even regexps can get > there. > > This is not to say that the editor shouldn't be a superb general-purpose > text tool. But understanding the language can add much on top of that. > > Gerhard > -

> I don't understand the logic of saying you've programmed for 20+ years and > not used code completion so therefor it's not useful. OK, can I add my vote? I have programmed for only some 15+ years, and recently I sometimes use editors with code completion and other nifty features like auto-placement of closing ) } etc, and they really annoy me. Often the option to switch off such features is buried deeply inside some specialist sub-configuration screen. Yuk! -- Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

@Rikard Bosnjakovic Let me put it this way: If you don't want code completion, why bother even using an IDE? Just stick to VIM and a Makefile and you're good to go. It's kind of like the old farmer saying ::: "I've been chopping trees with an axe for twenty years and never used, or had a need for a chainsaw". Well yes, the axe + muscle method works and builds your body (makes you memorize functions) but c'mon, get with the program. People invented chainsaws for a reason...

solarwind wrote: > @Rikard Bosnjakovic > > Let me put it this way: > > If you don't want code completion, why bother even using an IDE? I do like the "press a build all button, click on the first error, your cursor will be put on the offending source line". and I don't object to specifying the list of source files in a project pane, and having the IDE sort out the makefile (but I'd like to have an option to intervene when needed). and there are plenty more things I like, but NOT code completion. -- Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Wouter van Ooijen <KILLspamwouterspamBeGonevoti.nl> wrote: > > If you don't want code completion, why bother even using an IDE? > > I do like the "press a build all button, click on the first error, your > cursor will be put on the offending source line". and I don't object to > specifying the list of source files in a project pane, and having the > IDE sort out the makefile (but I'd like to have an option to intervene > when needed). and there are plenty more things I like, but NOT code > completion. You can do that with vim or emacs. Tamas -- Rudonix DoubleSaver http://www.rudonix.com

Tamas Rudnai wrote: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Wouter van Ooijen <EraseMEwouterEraseMEvoti.nl> wrote: > >>> If you don't want code completion, why bother even using an IDE? >> I do like the "press a build all button, click on the first error, your >> cursor will be put on the offending source line". and I don't object to >> specifying the list of source files in a project pane, and having the >> IDE sort out the makefile (but I'd like to have an option to intervene >> when needed). and there are plenty more things I like, but NOT code >> completion. > > > You can do that with vim or emacs. - my writing stated a few examples, not an exhaustive list - who says vim or emacs (with suitable extensions) don't qualify as IDEs? - I don't use vim or emcas in this way because (for me) the purpose of an IDE is to shield me from such details, I am sure it is possible to do such things but I want it to be done for me, not having to configure it myself. -- Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

solarwind wrote: > Let me put it this way: > > If you don't want code completion, why bother even using an IDE? Just > stick to VIM and a Makefile and you're good to go. It's kind of like > the old farmer saying > > ::: "I've been chopping trees with an axe for twenty years and never > used, or had a need for a chainsaw". > > Well yes, the axe + muscle method works and builds your body (makes > you memorize functions) but c'mon, get with the program. People > invented chainsaws for a reason... Your story reminds me of another story. A big guy walks into a store, and tells the clerk that he wants to return the chain saw, because it does not perform as advertized: "I was told it could cut ten logs an hour, but I can only make it do five". The clerk takes the chain saw, says "Well, let's see here", and starts the chain saw: "Vroooooom!" Big guy: "Wait a minute, how did you make it do that?"

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Vitaliy <@spam@spam@spam@spam_OUTmaksimov.org> wrote: > Your story reminds me of another story. > > A big guy walks into a store, and tells the clerk that he wants to return > the chain saw, because it does not perform as advertized: "I was told it > could cut ten logs an hour, but I can only make it do five". The clerk takes > the chain saw, says "Well, let's see here", and starts the chain saw: > "Vroooooom!" Big guy: "Wait a minute, how did you make it do that?" LOL! I LOVE IT! -- solarwind

Wouter van Ooijen wrote: > OK, can I add my vote? I have programmed for only some 15+ years, and > recently I sometimes use editors with code completion and other nifty > features like auto-placement of closing ) } etc, and they really annoy > me. Often the option to switch off such features is buried deeply inside > some specialist sub-configuration screen. Yuk! > I agree, to some extent. In fact, there is only one language where I *like* autocompletion, and that's RealBasic - and that's just because it is so highly object oriented that it is really useful for the autocompletion tools to help you with what values are there. Actually I think in realbasic I like *all* of the features that we are griping about. In anything other than realbasic, I dispise autocompletion. About the only features I like that are in this category are syntax coloring, and I like a editor which allows me to indent a block (yes, I know, most modern editors do this fine). Oh, and occasionally some really intelligent context-sensitive language/library help, when you can't remember for sure what order the arguments are - that is, you can hit f1 (or another key), and see the library documentation for the function you are on. -forrest

:: n fact, there is only one language where I :: *like* autocompletion, and that's RealBasic I don't like their autocompletion hows yer father because once it has started the auto complete, you can't just press the enter button - one has to continue writing, which makes the auto thingy some what redundant to me. MS Studio Express at leasts offers you some choices and then you can carry on yourself or accept what it offers. Colin -- cdb, spamBeGonecolinKILLspambtech-online.co.uk on 11/03/2009 Web presence: http://www.btech-online.co.uk Hosted by: http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=7988359

On Mar 10, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Forrest W Christian wrote: > I think in realbasic I like *all* of the features The thing I like about IDEs in general is that they seem to be consistently aimed at a PARTICULAR language/target/host. And when you start talking about different targets, you run into subtle annoying differences. I do too many things to trip up on gratuitous incompatibility. Gimme emacs (basically compatible versions on ITS, TOPS20, TOPS20, VMS, UNIX, CPM, MSDOS, macos, windows, etc, etc) (to be fair, other editors have also reached that degree of penetration, and even the default GUI "editable text panel" isn't AWFUL any more.) Eclipse might have been the answer, but I can't even get past the fact that it doesn't seem to allow my preferred black background (cursors disappear.) :-( BillW

William "Chops" Westfield wrote: > > Gimme emacs (basically compatible versions on ITS, > TOPS20, TOPS20, VMS, UNIX, CPM, MSDOS, macos, windows, etc, etc) (to > be fair, other editors have also reached that degree of penetration, > and even the default GUI "editable text panel" isn't AWFUL any more.) > Yes, we could definitely turn this into a vi versus emacs war :)... My favorite editor is actually vi. Or more accurately vim with syntax highlighting enabled. People love to complain about vi, but as a programmer I am significantly more productive editing-wise in vi than any other editor. Too much reaching for the mouse with everything else, plus it is just incredible what you can do in vi with just a few keystrokes. That said, I typically *do* end up using the built in editor in most development environments, just because the lost productivity with using an editor that isn't vi isn't enough to justify extracting the editor out of the make environment (including error highlighting). But if there isn't any good reason to use the IDE, I almost always reach for vi. -forrest

On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 1:18 AM, Forrest W Christian <TakeThisOuTforrestc.....TakeThisOuTimach.com> wrote: {Quote hidden}> William "Chops" Westfield wrote: >> >> Gimme emacs (basically compatible versions on ITS, >> TOPS20, TOPS20, VMS, UNIX, CPM, MSDOS, macos, windows, etc, etc) (to >> be fair, other editors have also reached that degree of penetration, >> and even the default GUI "editable text panel" isn't AWFUL any more.) >> > Yes, we could definitely turn this into a vi versus emacs war :)... > > My favorite editor is actually vi. Or more accurately vim with syntax > highlighting enabled. People love to complain about vi, but as a > programmer I am significantly more productive editing-wise in vi than > any other editor. Too much reaching for the mouse with everything > else, plus it is just incredible what you can do in vi with just a few > keystrokes. > > That said, I typically *do* end up using the built in editor in most > development environments, just because the lost productivity with using > an editor that isn't vi isn't enough to justify extracting the editor > out of the make environment (including error highlighting). But if > there isn't any good reason to use the IDE, I almost always reach for vi. No wai dooood, all t3h c00l ppl program by editing binary directly with a parallel toggle switch plate with latch button.

> About the > only features I like that are in this category are syntax coloring, and > I like a editor which allows me to indent a block (yes, I know, most > modern editors do this fine). Oh, and occasionally some really > intelligent context-sensitive language/library help, when you can't > remember for sure what order the arguments are - that is, you can hit f1 > (or another key), and see the library documentation for the function you > are on. I have no problem or even like most of those features. The common factor is that you have to take some specific action to invoke the feature, instead of it being invoked automatically while you are typing. -- Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

Wouter van Ooijen wrote: >> About the >> only features I like that are in this category are syntax coloring, and >> I like a editor which allows me to indent a block (yes, I know, most >> modern editors do this fine). Oh, and occasionally some really >> intelligent context-sensitive language/library help, when you can't >> remember for sure what order the arguments are - that is, you can hit f1 >> (or another key), and see the library documentation for the function you >> are on. > > I have no problem or even like most of those features. The common factor > is that you have to take some specific action to invoke the feature, > instead of it being invoked automatically while you are typing. So what's the problem, does it cause you to stumble while typing?

On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 6:32 AM, Wouter van Ooijen <.....wouterRemoveMEvoti.nl> wrote: > I have no problem or even like most of those features. The common factor > is that you have to take some specific action to invoke the feature, > instead of it being invoked automatically while you are typing. > In most of the editor you can setup the code complition to do it automagically or by a keystroke. I agree with you that the automagic is annoying. Tamas -- Rudonix DoubleSaver http://www.rudonix.com

On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 6:18 AM, Forrest W Christian <RemoveMEforrestcspamBeGoneimach.com>wrote: > My favorite editor is actually vi. Or more accurately vim with syntax > highlighting enabled. > Good man :-) > That said, I typically *do* end up using the built in editor in most > development environments, just because the lost productivity with using > an editor that isn't vi isn't enough to justify extracting the editor > out of the make environment (including error highlighting). But if > there isn't any good reason to use the IDE, I almost always reach for vi. > Many times I use vim to edit PIC asm and C code and then just use the MPLAB for compiling and simulation. Works great, Alt+TAB is a great invention :-) The only issue is when there is an error in compiling, so that I have to jump into the source line with <num>G instead of just double clicking on the error message. Tamas -- Rudonix DoubleSaver http://www.rudonix.com

solarwind wrote: > On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Wouter van Ooijen <wouterEraseMEvoti.nl> wrote: >>> So what's the problem, does it cause you to stumble while typing? >> no, it causes characters on the screen that I did not type. > > No it doesn't... They don't insert the text unless you press enter. It > merely shows a drop-down list of possible matches. I was talking about auto-placement of )}] etc in PSPad. That certainly does. Autocompletion that does not enter anything unless I acknowledge is one step less irritating (it steel confuses me when I see it, I look at the screen while I type). But for obvious reasons the acknowledge must not be a keyboard character. -- Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu