Post by thread:[PIC:] Which is the best PICBASIC compiler and de

Hi All, I normally program in asm but are looking for a rapid development language. It is important that I can write USB code for the 16c745, I know I will still have to edit the HID description etc manually but are looking for some way to speed things up a little. I have found at least two PICBASIC compilers on the net, Proton and MEL. Are there others? Is there a clear winner in feature or performance (such as code size etc)? I would prefer to pay for a commercial product to get ongoing development. Cost is not important (within reason!). I am trying to avoid C if I can, I already know how to write Basic or Pascal. regards Lee McLaren -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email spam_OUTlistservTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

I will be watching this one with great interest because I have something of the same situation. I would REALLY like a Pascal compiler for the PIC 18F series, but I have never heard of a Pascal comp for PICs. Although I do write C++ and C I would probably be better off with one of the Basic suites, so I am looking forward to this discussion. Roy J. Gromlich Renaissance Technologies {Quote hidden}> Hi All, > > I normally program in asm but are looking for a rapid development language. > It is important that I can write USB code for the 16c745, I know I will > still have to edit the HID description etc manually but are looking for some > way to speed things up a little. > > I have found at least two PICBASIC compilers on the net, Proton and MEL. Are > there others? > Is there a clear winner in feature or performance (such as code size etc)? > I would prefer to pay for a commercial product to get ongoing development. > Cost is not important (within reason!). > > I am trying to avoid C if I can, I already know how to write Basic or > Pascal. > > > regards > > > Lee McLaren > > -- > http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! > email .....listservKILLspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using PAdotNET WebMail. http://www.pa.net/ -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email listservKILLspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

And then there is also PICO32, from http://www.elab-pascal.de/ regards, Reelf Wouter van Ooijen schrieb: {Quote hidden}> > > but I have never heard of a Pascal comp for PICs. > > - p2c > - jal looks a lot like pascal > - http://www.beotel.yu/~zristic > - http://www.controlplus.nl/ > > I guess you have never read http://www.voti.nl/swp? > > Wouter van Ooijen > > -- ------------------------------------------- > Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl > consultancy, development, PICmicro products > > -- > http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! > email EraseMElistservspam_OUTTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body -- SyWiTec * Systeme für Wissenschaft und Technik Bamberg & Monsees GbR Steindamm 22 * D-28719 Bremen Fon +49-421-646775 * Fax +49-421-646785 http://www.sywitec.de/ SmartKit Electronic - Der Online-Shop http://www.smartkit.de/ -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email listservspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

Thank you for the information - and, no, I have not read it - I will do so at the earliest opportunity. There is a great deal of informationon PICs out there that I have not, as yet, had a chance to look up and digest. I took a long loop over the years from programming Z-80s and 6802s, through MS/DOS 8086s, to Windows and all of its loveable characteristics. More recently I have gotten back to designing small products which benifit from a small (but mighty) processor. So I have some catching-up to do here. Thanks, Roy J. Gromlich Renaissance Technologies {Quote hidden}> > but I have never heard of a Pascal comp for PICs. > > - p2c > - jal looks a lot like pascal > - http://www.beotel.yu/~zristic > - http://www.controlplus.nl/ > > I guess you have never read http://www.voti.nl/swp? > > Wouter van Ooijen > > -- ------------------------------------------- > Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl > consultancy, development, PICmicro products > > -- > http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! > email KILLspamlistservKILLspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using PAdotNET WebMail. http://www.pa.net/ -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email RemoveMElistservTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

> Hi All, > > I normally program in asm but are looking for a rapid development language. > It is important that I can write USB code for the 16c745, I know I will > still have to edit the HID description etc manually but are looking for some > way to speed things up a little. > > I have found at least two PICBASIC compilers on the net, Proton and MEL. Are > there others? > Is there a clear winner in feature or performance (such as code size etc)? > I would prefer to pay for a commercial product to get ongoing development. > Cost is not important (within reason!). > > I am trying to avoid C if I can, I already know how to write Basic or > Pascal. > > regards > > > Lee McLaren Well, I've used PBP from MEL for about a year now. And until last week I'd have recommended it without a thought. But a recent thread on the PBP list about "desired features" led me to take a good look at Proton+. As I understand it Proton+ has (and PBP doesn't) real function calls, 32 bit variables and floating point support. That's probably not enough to make me switch now, but I'll definitely keep an eye on it. The downside of PBP is they seem to be very slow at releasing new features, and not many people are fond of their upgrade policy. (IIRC $25 for every upgrade, and you have to mail them your ORIGINAL disks, then they mail you an upgrade) The proton+ web site advertises free upgrades, but I've not actually dealt with them. PBP is by far the more common product, and you'll find much more in the way of third party support and examples from other users. PBP is a command line only compiler. MEL makes an add on IDE, but microCode Studio is a better tool. It's about $45, but it gives you bootloaders for all the capable chips and an in circuit debugger. (it's not hardware like a microchip ICD or ICD 2, it's resident software and the same serial connection as the bootloader uses.) Not as effective as a hardware ICD, but useful for setting breakpoints and watching variables and the like. Others might shy away from a bootloader, but for me at least, it accelerates the development cycle by several orders of magnitude. Right now I can hit the compile/download button and have code running on my chip in about 20 seconds. As to the USB, I've not used it in the MEL product, and I've not seen any mention of it in conjunction with proton+, so I can't be much help there. But it does seem that the basic consensus is that the Microchip USB chips are sorely lacking when compared to other vendors products, I haven't seen many projects use them. Hope that helps some. -Denny -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email spamBeGonelistservspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

Microengioneering labs PICbasic is the one I have seen most often. I can tell you, after porting a project from Picbasic to C, that it is definitely not as efficient as a good C compiler. However, it is probably very efficient in terms of your *time* and quite straightforward to use. Microengineering Labs products are always extremely well engineered. I use their hardware (EPIC programmer, PIC Proto boards) daily. USB? I was just getting ready to ask if anyone is considering a USB project. I am trying to ramp up on USB stuff in order to start a project in March. I predict a steep and rocky learning curve, after a week of furious reading. Programming the '745 should be a snap, relatively. However I am no windows programmer. I am considering using Visual Basic ont he Windows side, because of familiarity, relative simplicity and because Jan Axelson's USB Complete 1st ed. shows examples in Visual Basic. The descriptions of reports, descriptor tables, classes, endpoints and so on has my head spinning. Need to get Axelson's 2nd edition. What are you doing on the PC side of the USB plug? What tools, references, or preparation do you consider necessary for completing a USB project? For instance, a USB protocol analyzer? (Which could set you back more than a good scope) is this necessary? Apparently Axelson wrote her first USB edition without this tool. Sorta like programming a PIC wihtout ICD or ICE, which I have done plenty of times. Is this a commercial project? If so is your company joining the USB-IF? Who do you plan to use for USB 2.0 compliance testying? Outside labs, or a plugfest? -- Lawrence Lile Senior Project Engineer Toastmaster, Inc. Division of Salton, Inc. 573-446-5661 voice 573-446-5676 fax Lee McLaren <RemoveMElmclarenTakeThisOuTTASNET.NET> Sent by: pic microcontroller discussion list <PICLISTEraseME.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU> 02/09/2004 03:07 AM Please respond to pic microcontroller discussion list To: EraseMEPICLISTMITVMA.MIT.EDU cc: Subject: [PIC:] Which is the best PICBASIC compiler and development environment? Hi All, I normally program in asm but are looking for a rapid development language. It is important that I can write USB code for the 16c745, I know I will still have to edit the HID description etc manually but are looking for some way to speed things up a little. I have found at least two PICBASIC compilers on the net, Proton and MEL. Are there others? Is there a clear winner in feature or performance (such as code size etc)? I would prefer to pay for a commercial product to get ongoing development. Cost is not important (within reason!). I am trying to avoid C if I can, I already know how to write Basic or Pascal. regards Lee McLaren -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email RemoveMElistservEraseMEEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email RemoveMElistservspam_OUTKILLspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

I think Proton+ & PBP are both excellent compilers. PBP has more device support at present, and meLabs is very fast to add new device support when Microchip cranks out yet another version of something. Proton+ is also very nice, but a real pain if you need to install the compiler on more than 1 workstation, or have any problems during the initial install process. Pretty heavy-hitting software protection scheme. They have a USB dongle option that allows installation on more than 1 station, but I've never tried it. May be the way to go if you're not strapped to a single workstation during development. I would download manuals & demos for both before taking the leap. Both have features, pros & cons when compared to each other. I still prefer PBP, but Proton+ is catching up. PBP manual: www.microengineeringlabs.com/downloads/pbpm502a.PDF PBP demo: http://melabs.com/downloads/PBPDEMO.ZIP Proton manual: www.compile-it.com/picbasicplus/PROTON%20Manual.pdf Proton lite demo: http://www.picbasic.org/filedb/ If I have something I need to knock-off quickly I use PBP. If it can't be done without floating point I'll opt for Proton+. If I need fp support & interrupts then I lean towards CCS C, but nothing beats reviewing the manuals and demos before you commit to one. Regards, -Bruce RemoveMEtechTakeThisOuTspamrentron.com http://www.rentron.com {Quote hidden}> Hi All, > > I normally program in asm but are looking for a rapid development language. > It is important that I can write USB code for the 16c745, I know I will > still have to edit the HID description etc manually but are looking for some > way to speed things up a little. > > I have found at least two PICBASIC compilers on the net, Proton and MEL. Are > there others? > Is there a clear winner in feature or performance (such as code size etc)? > I would prefer to pay for a commercial product to get ongoing development. > Cost is not important (within reason!). > > I am trying to avoid C if I can, I already know how to write Basic or > Pascal. > > > regards > > > Lee McLaren > > -- > http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! > email EraseMElistservspamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body > > -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email RemoveMElistservKILLspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

> I think Proton+ & PBP are both excellent compilers. PBP has more device > support at present, and meLabs is very fast to add new device support when > Microchip cranks out yet another version of something. Agreed, the folks at MEL are very fast at adding new devices. But, in my experiance, adding new features is another thing. > Proton+ is also very nice, but a real pain if you need to install the compiler on > more than 1 workstation, or have any problems during the initial install process. > Pretty heavy-hitting software protection scheme. That's good to know, I've never been a fan of invasive protection schemes. > They have a USB dongle option that allows installation on more than 1 station, > but I've never tried it. May be the way to go if you're not strapped to a single > workstation during development. > > I would download manuals & demos for both before taking the leap. Both have > features, pros & cons when compared to each other. I still prefer PBP, but > Proton+ is catching up. > > PBP manual: www.microengineeringlabs.com/downloads/pbpm502a.PDF > PBP demo: http://melabs.com/downloads/PBPDEMO.ZIP > > Proton manual: www.compile-it.com/picbasicplus/PROTON%20Manual.pdf > Proton lite demo: http://www.picbasic.org/filedb/ > Could you check on that link for the proton manual? I think somthing got moved around some. > If I have something I need to knock-off quickly I use PBP. If it can't be done without > floating point I'll opt for Proton+. If I need fp support & interrupts then I lean towards > CCS C, but nothing beats reviewing the manuals and demos before you commit {Quote hidden}> to one. > > > Regards, > > -Bruce > techSTOPspamspam_OUTrentron.com > http://www.rentron.com > > Thanks Bruce, another very helpful post. -Denny -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email spamBeGonelistservSTOPspamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

Thanks for the information - especially on Proton+. The protection scheme will almost certainly rule them out of my selection, as I have no choice but to work on several different computers on a daily basis. I simply can NOT have software which is going to fight me on this. Too bad, as it sounds like an interesting product. Roy J. Gromlich {Quote hidden}> > I think Proton+ & PBP are both excellent compilers. PBP has more device > > support at present, and meLabs is very fast to add new device support > when > > Microchip cranks out yet another version of something. > > Agreed, the folks at MEL are very fast at adding new devices. But, in my > experiance, adding new features is another thing. > > > Proton+ is also very nice, but a real pain if you need to install the > compiler on > > more than 1 workstation, or have any problems during the initial install > process. > > Pretty heavy-hitting software protection scheme. > > That's good to know, I've never been a fan of invasive protection schemes. > > > They have a USB dongle option that allows installation on more than 1 > station, > > but I've never tried it. May be the way to go if you're not strapped to a > single > > workstation during development. > > > > I would download manuals & demos for both before taking the leap. Both > have > > features, pros & cons when compared to each other. I still prefer PBP, > but > > Proton+ is catching up. > > > > PBP manual: www.microengineeringlabs.com/downloads/pbpm502a.PDF > > PBP demo: http://melabs.com/downloads/PBPDEMO.ZIP > > > > Proton manual: www.compile-it.com/picbasicplus/PROTON%20Manual.pdf > > Proton lite demo: http://www.picbasic.org/filedb/ > > > > Could you check on that link for the proton manual? I think somthing got > moved around some. > > > If I have something I need to knock-off quickly I use PBP. If it can't be > done without > > floating point I'll opt for Proton+. If I need fp support & interrupts > then I lean towards > > CCS C, but nothing beats reviewing the manuals and demos before you > commit > > to one. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > -Bruce > > KILLspamtechspamBeGonerentron.com > > http://www.rentron.com > > > > > > Thanks Bruce, another very helpful post. > -Denny > > -- > http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! > email EraseMElistservEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using PAdotNET WebMail. http://www.pa.net/ -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email @spam@listserv@spam@spam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

> Agreed, the folks at MEL are very fast at adding new devices. But, in my > experiance, adding new features is another thing. Yeah I know. Would be great to take all the best features from PBP, Proton+ and CCS C - then roll them into a single unit. > protection scheme. > > That's good to know, I've never been a fan of invasive protection schemes. It definitely limits you to a single workstation unless you opt for the USB dongle. My workstations already look like porcupines with CAD dongles and other various adapters hanging off every available port - so I'm not a big fan of hardware dongles. > Could you check on that link for the proton manual? I think somthing got > moved around some. Start here http://www.picbasic.org/ and go into the downloads section. Not sure what happened to the link previously sent. Sorry. I've just started tinkering with Olins assembly development environment at http://www.embedinc.com/pic/ If you're doing everything in assembly, this is definitely the route to take. Thanks Olin...;o] Regards, -Bruce spamBeGonetechKILLspamrentron.com http://www.rentron.com -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email .....listservspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

Ooh a USB connected blender? Sign me up! It uses a database on the computer to look up exactly how much time to blend for. *ahem* anyways...check out www.sxlist.com/techref/io/serial/usb/atapchi/index.html for a small USB Analyzer based on the SX chip. I don't know if it's exactly what you're looking for, but it is inexpensive and should be easy to use. Hope that helps, Josh -- A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams TakeThisOuTllile.....TakeThisOuTSALTONUSA.COM wrote: > For instance, a USB protocol analyzer? (Which could set you back more > than a good scope) is this necessary? Apparently Axelson wrote her first > USB edition without this tool. Sorta like programming a PIC wihtout ICD > or ICE, which I have done plenty of times. -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email TakeThisOuTlistservKILLspamspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

Thanks to everyone for replying, Both still sound very interesting but the copy protection on the Proton compiler is a concern. In answer to Lawrence's question, I write windows apps etc in Delphi 7, The ability to write apps for everything from web apps to windows services and the ability to reuse the same code in a lot of cases for Linux is a major plus. Not to mention the free components that you can download such as the Jedi and Indy component sets which are amazing. USB support was a free download. The windows side is the easy part. Even with PICBASIC the HID descriptors are still causing problems. The examples from Microchip are a bit poor in that they emulate devices like keyboards and mice where I want bi-directional communications. There was a very poor demo program available from Elektor, the supplied hex file does not work and there was no asm code included, luckily there was a .$$$ backup that had the asm in it. Good places to start anyway... This will end up being a commercial app, and no I wont be joining USB-IF. I am using Snoopy for coms testing and doing the rest the hard way with crash and burn. Regards Lee McLaren {Original Message removed}

Nope, not a blender. It is a USB connected shoe brush. Downloads a different type of brush motion for each type of shoe. All the user has to do is move the brush in the correct direction .......... I have actually seen a blender with a complete bartender's database on a display in the front. You've got a recipe for every obscure mixed drink or concoction from Virgin Maries to Bloody Sunrises. (yeech.) -- Lawrence Lile Senior Project Engineer Toastmaster, Inc. Division of Salton, Inc. 573-446-5661 voice 573-446-5676 fax Josh Koffman <.....listsjoshRemoveME3MTMP.COM> Sent by: pic microcontroller discussion list <RemoveMEPICLISTspamBeGoneMITVMA.MIT.EDU> 02/09/2004 06:03 PM Please respond to pic microcontroller discussion list To: spamBeGonePICLIST@spam@spam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU cc: Subject: Re: [PIC:] Which is the best PICBASIC compiler and development environment? Ooh a USB connected blender? Sign me up! It uses a database on the computer to look up exactly how much time to blend for. *ahem* anyways...check out www.sxlist.com/techref/io/serial/usb/atapchi/index.html for a small USB Analyzer based on the SX chip. I don't know if it's exactly what you're looking for, but it is inexpensive and should be easy to use. Hope that helps, Josh -- A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams TakeThisOuTllilespamSALTONUSA.COM wrote: > For instance, a USB protocol analyzer? (Which could set you back more > than a good scope) is this necessary? Apparently Axelson wrote her first > USB edition without this tool. Sorta like programming a PIC wihtout ICD > or ICE, which I have done plenty of times. -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email listservEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestEraseMEspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu

Michael J. Pawlowsky wrote: > One thing to also look at is how each company provides upgrades and the cost. > > I know of 3 Basic compilers. > > > MELabs PicBasic Pro > Basic Micro's MBasic > and Proton +. > > > I've used PBP quite a bit and really love it for the speed it takes to develop a simple project. > However once your projects get to be more complex, then I think a C-compiler is the way to go. XCSB is a structured BASIC and the compiler produces very efficient code. The following XCSB code illustrates the point proc inline write_bit(ubyte *ptr, ubyte id) ubyte x if ptr == &PORTA then x = 1 else if ptr == &PORTB then x = 2 else x = 3 endif endproc proc main() write_bit(&PORTA, 3) endproc This code compiles to just 2 instructions 0069 main 0069 30 01 movlw 1 006A 00 A6 movwf x_write_bit_func_local 006B main_func_exit_point Regards Sergio Masci http://www.xcprod.com/titan/XCSB - optimising structured PIC BASIC compiler -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads