Searching \ for 'C compilers' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/language/index.htm?key=c
Search entire site for: 'C compilers'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'C compilers'
1995\02\03@105057 by Jason E Gorden

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2 Feb 1995, David Fenyes wrote:

> Also, if optimization is not a problem, there is a "Tiny" C compiler
> which is powerful enough to compile itself on comp.sources.unix
> volume 5 (based on Ron Cain's original compiler).  This has code
> generators for 8080, 6502, 6809, etc. which would be good models
> for PIC or other code generators, and would also be a good starting
> point for a PD C compiler.

This may be a better starting point than GCC.  Concerning the limitations
(or challenges :-) of the PIC as it relates to passing large amounts on
parameters on the stack, having pointers and arrays and floating point
math: I don't see it as an all or nothing proposition as some have
suggested.  Certain things like loops and conditionals can be implemented
fairly efficiently and consistently, so that you can write readable code
that has a better chance of working right the first (or second or third)
time.  If it seems more logical (or efficient) to write a bit of code in
assembler, put it inline.

To me, using a C compiler (or a subset-of-C-compiler) is is not a matter
of laziness or a fear to learn the PIC instruction set (it is easy to
learn) but an issue of convenience.  And sometimes one may want to do
multiple precision integer math or floating point.  Then they would have
to link in code that might consume a great deal of the PIC's resources,
but if it is a simple application that just wants to meke a few floating
point calcs, maybe it is appropriate, and I understand, not for everyone :-).

Admittedly, there is no way to have a full implementation of C for a
16C84, like GCC on a Sun.  Even printf("%d", 1); is probably out of reach.
But I honestly believe a useful and simple subset of C can make a
powerful and convenient compiler.  IMO, the CCS compiler is 90% there, but
alas, it would be nice to have source code and FREE software!

Jason


'C compilers'
1995\10\06@175206 by Robin Abbott
flavicon
face
I am interested in John loch's message about C compilers. Having
written a C compiler myself (many years ago for a Z80), then I
became very aware of the need for masses of stack space! I just
can't see this on any of the PIC's in the 5X,6x,7x series unless
perhaps the 74 offers enough RAM.

Has anyone experience of these compilers, are they sensible for
real applications or they so full of limitations that real use
is limited?

spam_OUTrobin.abbottTakeThisOuTspamdial.pipex.com


'C Compilers'
1995\11\16@074326 by Dermot
flavicon
face
On Wed, 15 Nov 1995, Declan O'Connor wrote:

>      I came across another C compiler for the PIC series of devices. So far
>      the only information I can get is a specification given on web page:
>      http://execpc.com/~ccs/picc.html run by a bunch calling themselves
>      Custom Computer Services. It certainly sounds a comprehensive package
>      but as it costs $99 I'd like to know if anyone can personally
>      recommend it?

Hi,

I'm just about to plunge headlong into the world of PICs and I'm
interested in obtaining a C cross-compiler for development work. I'd be
interested in any information on the available tools. I was only aware of
the MPC compiler listed in the Microchip data book. I assume this is the
'official' C compiler. Is it the best?

Regards,
_________________________________________________________________________
 __     __   ___             __   ____  <>  Electrical Engineering Dept.
/  \   /_   /__/  /\  /\    /  /   /    <>    University of Bradford
/___/  /__  /  \  /  \/  \  /__/   /     <>            England

1995\11\16@075155 by Clyde Smith-Stubbs

flavicon
face
G'day,

> I'm just about to plunge headlong into the world of PICs and I'm
> interested in obtaining a C cross-compiler for development work. I'd be
> interested in any information on the available tools. I was only aware of
> the MPC compiler listed in the Microchip data book. I assume this is the
> 'official' C compiler. Is it the best?

The MPC compiler is not "official", it is a product of Bytecraft Inc.
It's a subset C compiler, but is at present the only one available
for the PIC. This will change in the near future. We are developing
a PIC compiler which will be, within architectural limitations, a
full ANSI compiler. Release is expected early next year.

Regards, Clyde

--
Clyde Smith-Stubbs       | HI-TECH Software,       | Voice: +61 7 3300 5011
.....clydeKILLspamspam@spam@hitech.com.au      | P.O. Box 103, Alderley, | Fax:   +61 7 3300 5246
http://www.hitech.com.au  | QLD, 4051, AUSTRALIA.   | BBS:   +61 7 3300 5235
                   HI-TECH C: Compiling the real world...

1995\11\16@103532 by Rick Miller

flavicon
face
On Thu, 16 Nov 1995, Dermot wrote:
> I'm just about to plunge headlong into the world of PICs and I'm
> interested in obtaining a C cross-compiler for development work. I'd be
> interested in any information on the available tools. I was only aware of
> the MPC compiler listed in the Microchip data book. I assume this is the
> 'official' C compiler. Is it the best?

There are 3 C compilers I know of for PICs...

 o MPC - available as a crippled demo, or pay for the full-blown version.
 o PICC - $99 from CCS.

 o pic_cc - Freely available in ANSI C source, compiles fine under
            UNIX-like OS's, DOS, and even on an Amiga.

Pic_cc is a port of "Small C" to the PIC16C84 *only* though.  I'd presume
that the other two (commercial) compilers should handle compilation for
any of the PIC uC's.

There's also Byron's "Nano-Pseudo-C" (NPC) for 16C5x and 17Cxx PICs,
available in free C source code.  It looks pretty capable, and seems
to produce *much* tighter code than any full-blown C compiler.

Anyway, if you'd like to get in on the development (or "testing") of
any of the free PIC development tools we're working on, you can subscribe
to the "gnupicspamKILLspamdigalogsys.com" mailing list, or check out:

 <www.execpc.com/~digalog/.magic/address.html>
 (which *should* lead you to the GNUPIC archive,
  as long as our flaky firewall is connected.)

Rick Miller, Design Engineer  (and local "Internet Guy")
Digalog Systems, Inc.         <.....rickKILLspamspam.....digalogsys.com>
3180 S. 166th St.             <EraseMERick.Millerspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTLinux.org>
New Berlin, WI  53151  USA    +1 414 797 8000 x-228

1995\11\17@092532 by Stuart Allman

flavicon
face
>  o MPC - available as a crippled demo, or pay for the full-blown version.

Where can I get the crippled demo of bytecraft's MPC?

Stuart Allman
studiospamspam_OUThalcyon.com
Stuart Allman
@spam@studioKILLspamspamhalcyon.com

1995\11\18@122822 by Lovrich -- Applications

picon face
Staurt,

A copy of the mpc demo is on the Microchip bbs in the third party area.

Al

On Fri, 17 Nov 1995, Stuart Allman wrote:

> >  o MPC - available as a crippled demo, or pay for the full-blown version.
>
> Where can I get the crippled demo of bytecraft's MPC?
>
> Stuart Allman
> KILLspamstudioKILLspamspamhalcyon.com
> Stuart Allman
> RemoveMEstudioTakeThisOuTspamhalcyon.com
>

1995\11\18@123649 by Andrew Warren

face
flavicon
face
Al Lovrich (spamBeGoneAl.LovrichspamBeGonespammicrochip.com) wrote:

>A copy of the mpc demo is on the Microchip bbs in the third party area.

   It's important to note, though, that the demo software on Microchip's
   BBS is a VERY old version... The compiler has improved substantially
   since then.

   -Andy

   P.S.  It's not a "crippled" demo, by the way... Its only limitation is
         that it won't generate more than 256-or-so bytes of code.


--
Andrew Warren - TakeThisOuTfastfwdEraseMEspamspam_OUTix.netcom.com
Fast Forward Engineering, Vista, California


'C compilers'
1998\05\01@214021 by Mark S.
flavicon
face
Anyone used the C compiler from CCS? At $99, it seems like a deal.

Thanks,
Mark

1998\05\02@155442 by Sylvia Dokua Kwakye

flavicon
face
>Anyone used the C compiler from CCS? At $99, it seems like a deal.
>
>Thanks,
>Mark

I use their PCM dos compiler and I think it's great.
Sylvia

1998\05\04@075629 by John Walker

flavicon
face
Mark,
       I have been using the CCS compiler for about a year now and am very
pleased with the results. The Serial, I2C, and SPI functions included in
the library that comes with the compiler all worked great, no modifications
were needed. I was happy with the LCD functions I had written previously,
so I haven't tried those out, but they are included. I felt for the $99 I
spent on it, I really got my moneysworth back.

John

At 04:32 PM 5/1/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Anyone used the C compiler from CCS? At $99, it seems like a deal.
>
>Thanks,
>Mark
>
>

1998\05\05@070936 by Keith Howell

flavicon
face
One of their reps sold it to a colleague,
swearing it beat hand-written assembler.
Which is a blatant f***ing lie.
Unless he meant hand written by a baboon.
It failed to spot simple optimisations,
which I had to force-code it to do.
Its cheap, even at 99 UKP (= 160 USD)
and it has code libraries but its not very smart.

1998\05\05@183953 by Gordon Couger

flavicon
face
Well written C can come close to assembler if you never use:
printf, scanf, floating point, or any other hight level function and
do careful profiling and hand optomize the tight spots with asm.

>One of their reps sold it to a colleague,
>swearing it beat hand-written assembler.
>Which is a blatant f***ing lie.
>Unless he meant hand written by a baboon.
>It failed to spot simple optimisations,
>which I had to force-code it to do.
>Its cheap, even at 99 UKP (= 160 USD)
>and it has code libraries but its not very smart.
=========
I can excuse the salesman greed is an understandable
emotion but the guy that bought it should be shot so there
is no danger of him further degrading the gene pool.

Gordon
]
Gordon Couger RemoveMEgcougerspamTakeThisOuTrfdata.net
624 Cheyenne
Stillwater, OK 74075
405 624-2855   GMT -6:00

1998\05\06@085925 by Chris Savage

flavicon
picon face
And never use a 2500AD compiler.

Sorry that's [OT]A Pet Peeve.

Gordon Couger wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Savage                    EraseMEchrisspamcti-vision.demon.co.uk
Software Engineer               +44 385 396 993
CTIVision Ltd, Egham, UK
----------------------------------------------------------------

1998\05\11@032717 by David Callaert

picon face
Hello,

I already asked a question about the Hi-tech C compiler.

Can anyone tel me if there is a better compiler.

Which one do you prefer?  CCS, Hi-tech, ByteCraft ?


Thanks in advance,

David

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

1998\05\11@032722 by David Callaert

picon face
Hello,

I already asked a question about the Hi-tech C compiler.

Can anyone tel me if there is a better compiler?

Which one do you prefer?
Price / Quality ?
        CCS, Hi-tech, ByteCraft,... ?

Thanks in advance,

David

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


'c compilers'
1998\07\27@133606 by Don
flavicon
face
I want to try to learn C. So, I'll need a compiler for the pics and also
a compiler that runs under windoze or dos, so I can learn the language.
I have a book called "programming in C", by Stephen G. Kochan. I would
like to keep the cost as near zero as possible. I downloaded some
compilers for windoze or dos. Most of them wouldnt even compile their
own sample programs. So far the only one that seems to work is the
pacific shareware version, but I dont know what its limitations are. At
least it has enough info to run it. Does anyone have any
reccommendations for decent compilers that I should look at? Also, what
is available for the pics, since I would eventually need a pic compiler?

Thanks,
Don

1998\07\27@140442 by John Bellini

flavicon
face
You can try Byte Craft (http:\\http://www.bytecraft.com) (dos based)
IAR http:\\http://www.iar.com windoze based.

... to start with.

{Original Message removed}


'C compilers'
1999\10\07@173011 by Anne Ogborn
flavicon
face
Anybody got a favo-rite (oh, goody, I get to start a religious war)
C compiler for the PIC? This is for real work, not play, so I'd rather
pay $$$ and get something decent, but I want to do reasonably simple
things with something I can set up and use without a huge learning curve.

I've been programming in MPASM, and just realized this would all
go quicker in C.
Used to think this'd be a simple project, but t'aint

Annie

1999\10\07@175135 by Andy Kunz

flavicon
face
At 02:26 PM 10/7/1999 -0700, you wrote:
>Anybody got a favo-rite (oh, goody, I get to start a religious war)

My favorite is HiTech PICC.  I have been lambasted because I have library
functions available for it for sale, but it doesn't matter - I still like it.

My reasons include:

1) Excellent command-line interface
2) Includes an assembler that supports relocatable code
3) Optimizes quite nicely
4) EXCELLENT tech support
5) Very stable

To be fair, Tjaart (where ever he may be) loves Bytecraft because it also
supports the Atmel's, I think.  He would probably give the same list for
them as I have given for HiTech.

The only thing I'm not sure of is the assembler/linker in Bytecraft.

Andy

==================================================================
Eternity is only a heartbeat away - are you ready?  Ask me how!
------------------------------------------------------------------
RemoveMEandyEraseMEspamEraseMErc-hydros.com      http://www.rc-hydros.com     - Race Boats
RemoveMEandyspam_OUTspamKILLspammontanadesign.com  http://www.montanadesign.com - Electronics
==================================================================

1999\10\07@181821 by Brent Crosby

flavicon
face
Annie:

 I have used the IAR for the Atmel AVR parts. I think
it is pretty good. Lots of bucks though. Good support,
solid product. I don't know about the PIC version, but
I would assume it is good too.

At 02:26 PM 10/7/99 , you wrote:
{Quote hidden}

| Brent A. Crosby
| Crystalfontz America, Incorporated
| toll free (888) 206-9720 voice (509) 291-3514 facsimile (509) 291-3345
| http://www.crystalfontz.com RemoveMEbrentTakeThisOuTspamspamcrystalfontz.com
| Economical, feature packed, serial interface LCD modules.

1999\10\07@183449 by Jose Souto

flavicon
face
I got impressed with the generated code and temporary
variables handling CC5X does. I compared with another
one that is well accepted and has a demo to download.
They have a www page comparing them with another
compiler and I compiled the source from the page. Yes, I
had to simplify some constructions since CC5X is not
ANSI C though I got better results.
I always manage to have it coding as I would code in
assembly but spaguetti code. At http://www.bknd.com they
have a free version for up to 1K code that you may try.
BR's
JSouto

Anne Ogborn wrote:

{Quote hidden}

1999\10\07@184056 by Dennis Plunkett

flavicon
face
At 14:26 7/10/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Anybody got a favo-rite (oh, goody, I get to start a religious war)
>C compiler for the PIC? This is for real work, not play, so I'd rather
>pay $$$ and get something decent, but I want to do reasonably simple
>things with something I can set up and use without a huge learning curve.
>
>I've been programming in MPASM, and just realized this would all
>go quicker in C.
>Used to think this'd be a simple project, but t'aint
>
>Annie
>
>

Annie (Your mail address spells this wrong!)
Simple use HI-TECH


Dennis

1999\10\07@185502 by glentorr

picon face
Hi Annie and All,

I have bought HiTec C and like it, I am fairly new to C in general and C for PIC
s in particular but I am finding it reasonably straight foward and fun to learn,
just time consuming.
The reason I went to C was to try and generate pic applications more quickly.

FWIW

Glen Torr

TorrTech

__________________________________________________________
Message sent by MyMail http://www.mymail.com.au/

1999\10\07@190538 by Sean H. Breheny

face picon face
What's the URL for HiTech? I may be in a position to select a C compiler
for this helicopter project I'm working on and I would need a good one.

Sean

At 05:49 PM 10/7/99 -0400, you wrote:
{Quote hidden}

| Sean Breheny
| Amateur Radio Callsign: KA3YXM
| Electrical Engineering Student
\--------------=----------------
Save lives, please look at http://www.all.org
Personal page: http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/shb7
shb7STOPspamspamspam_OUTcornell.edu ICQ #: 3329174

1999\10\07@190947 by Anne Ogborn

flavicon
face
Thanks guys -
 I've just got a lot of 16 bit (and one or two 32 bit) numbers floating
around,
and I'm getting tired of hand coding 16 bit adds.

Annie

1999\10\07@192025 by Randy Brumbaugh

flavicon
face
have you tried macros?

I had a similar problem with a lot of 16 and 32 bit calcs.  I built a bunch
of add/subtract/compare macros with some help from Microchip's app notes.

eliminates hand coding, without the pain of a C compiler.


At 04:06 PM 10/7/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Thanks guys -
>  I've just got a lot of 16 bit (and one or two 32 bit) numbers floating
>around,
>and I'm getting tired of hand coding 16 bit adds.
>
>Annie
>
>

1999\10\07@201721 by walter

picon face
Andy Kunz wrote:

>
> To be fair, Tjaart (where ever he may be) loves Bytecraft
> because it also supports the Atmel's, I think. He would
> probably give the same list for them as I have given
> for HiTech.
>
> The only thing I'm not sure of is the assembler/linker
> in Bytecraft.

To answer your open questions.

- Byte Craft does NOT support Atmel AVR, but we support
 a broad range of embedded microprocessors and
 micocontrollers.
- Byte Craft originally wrote MPASM and the
 assembler in MPC has a very similar in feature set.
- Byte Craft's Linker is a smart linker that links
 intermediate code allowing for full application
 optimization.
- The linker allows mixing of assembler and C. Assembler
 code in the application is not optimized

Walter Banks
http://www.bytecraft.com

1999\10\07@223901 by Andy Kunz

flavicon
face
At 07:02 PM 10/7/1999 -0400, you wrote:
>What's the URL for HiTech? I may be in a position to select a C compiler
>for this helicopter project I'm working on and I would need a good one.

http://www.htsoft.com

Andy

==================================================================
Eternity is only a heartbeat away - are you ready?  Ask me how!
------------------------------------------------------------------
spamBeGoneandySTOPspamspamEraseMErc-hydros.com      http://www.rc-hydros.com     - Race Boats
KILLspamandyspamBeGonespammontanadesign.com  http://www.montanadesign.com - Electronics
==================================================================

1999\10\08@014034 by Kevin J. Maciunas

flavicon
picon face
I have(*) a copy of the CCS C compiler (PCM).  I've used this in a
couple of projects without any problems whatever (so far).  I recall the
last time this question was asked, the CCS compiler came in for a bit of
a hard time.

My comments:
1) Like most compilers (especially the ones my student's write :-) ) it
has some bugs
2) Can't comment on the "efficiency" of the code, but it doesn't look
too bad
3) The #use rs232 stuff is wonderful for me
4) The support of 16 bit arithmetic is good, as is the IEEE754 32 bit
floats.

I've used it to generate 1018words of code for a F84 (that was just too
close) and (from memory) 5Kw of F877 code so it does seem to work.  Some
people commented last time that it didn't work for large codes, I don't
seem to have that problem.

(*) I don't at present HAVE a copy of the compiler, some thieving
rat-bag stole my notebook computer (with all the install disks...) from
my office.  The CCS people are shipping me a new copy (thanks!).

There are several things about the compiler that I DON'T like, but they
are the consequences of being a CS academic, not really intrinsic
flaws.  The king hit bad feature is that it runs under DOS/Windoze etc -
and doesn't like me using editors other than it's built in "IDE" editor.

As a practicing scientist, I am not in a position to say it is better
(or worse) than any other C compiler, but it has worked reliably for me
on some reasonable sized projects:
   * F84 - Conversion of Aisin Seiki GPS data to NMEA-0183 format
   * F84 - Thermostat (PID) controller of a room air-conditioner (with
RS-232 uplink)
   *F877 - Home brewery controller (PID control again, LCD display,
keypad & RS232)
   *F877 - (Well, F84 at present) Irrigation controller

Unfortunately, since I no longer have the notebook, I no longer have the
compiler or some of the code I wrote :-(

/Kevin

--
-----------
Kevin J. Maciunas           Net: EraseMEkevinspamEraseMEcs.adelaide.edu.au
Dept. of Computer Science   Ph : +61 8 8303 5845
University of Adelaide      Fax: +61 8 8303 4366
Adelaide 5005
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

1999\10\08@084524 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
I've actually had no problem integrating it with MPLAB, and it works
flawlessly in that regard for me.  Simulating, compiling and programming
are a snap.

-Adam

Some people call me crazy, but I like to think of myself as a freelance
lunatic.

"Kevin J. Maciunas" wrote:
>
> I have(*) a copy of the CCS C compiler (PCM).  I've used this in a
> couple of projects without any problems whatever (so far).  I recall the
> last time this question was asked, the CCS compiler came in for a bit of
> a hard time.

<snip>

> The king hit bad feature is that it runs under DOS/Windoze etc -
> and doesn't like me using editors other than it's built in "IDE" editor.

<snip>

> /Kevin

1999\10\08@093724 by eplus1

flavicon
face
<BLOCKQUOTE AUTHOR="Anne Ogborn">
and I'm getting tired of hand coding 16 bit adds.
</BLOCKQUOTE>

MACROS!

James Newton @spam@jamesnewton@spam@spamspam_OUTgeocities.com phone:1-619-652-0593)
webmaster http://techref.homepage.com NOW OPEN TO NON-MEMBERS!
Members: Add your own private/public comments/pages (TANSTAAFL web hosting)

1999\10\08@095813 by Matt Burch

flavicon
face
At 02:17 PM 10/8/99 +0930, Kevin J. Maciunas wrote:

[on the CCS compiler]

>There are several things about the compiler that I DON'T like, but they
>are the consequences of being a CS academic, not really intrinsic
>flaws.  The king hit bad feature is that it runs under DOS/Windoze etc -
>and doesn't like me using editors other than it's built in "IDE" editor.

We use the CCS compiler here, and I agree with anyone who says that the
built-in editor suck bigtime... however, it's not a problem to hook the
command-line compiler up to your favorite text editor, as long as it is
smart enough to map a keystroke to the invocation of an external program (I
use Boxer 99 - http://www.boxersoftware.com)  CCS is a pretty nice compiler with a
ton of built-in utility calls that make things like I2C really easy. As
long as you aren't forced to use the built-in editor it's quite usable.

mcb

1999\10\08@095819 by Robin Abbott

flavicon
face
part 0 16 bytes
</x-html>

1999\10\08@104017 by Pike, Lesley C.

flavicon
face
We've used the Bytecraft, CCS, and Hi-Tech compilers on various projects
here.  So far, the Hi-Tech seems to be the most reliable and ANSI-compatible
of the bunch, but I've heard very good things about IAR from other
engineers, and we're going to be evaluating Microchip's MPLAB C-17 for use
on our new 17C756 project.  I've heard some pretty good things about it,
too, but of course it's only works for the 17 series.

Lesley C. Pike
Sr. Software Project Engineer
Baker Oil Tools


{Quote hidden}

1999\10\08@105724 by Dan Creagan

flavicon
face
Without putting too fine an edge on it - CCS is pretty good. You get very
little support from the developers, but there are tons of people out there
that help with it.  I truly think that if they charged a bit more, and then
offered support for the product, it would get better respect from the people
that are doing this for a living.  Sometimes, PIC developers live and die by
the support they get for their tools. Not so with me and many others - and
for us, CCS is good.

Most of the inconsistencies of CCS  involve almost trivial formatting
issues - once resolved, the code runs fine. The canned routines are a dream
when you are trying to get something going quickly. Much easier than my
experience (very limited) with the other compilers. Since I'm NOT doing this
for a living, the ease of doing one-off  jobs, the canned routines, and the
good user base,  makes CCS the only compiler I need.

Dan

See example CCS code for the Benson Easy Pic 'n book at :
http://204.233.101.40/robots/pic1.html


{Original Message removed}

1999\10\08@144455 by Barry King

flavicon
face
> I recall the
> last time this question was asked, the CCS compiler came in for a bit of
> a hard time.

Probably from me.  Caveat emptor, and how do you say "what do
you expect, its cheap?" in latin?

"Kevin J. Maciunas" <TakeThisOuTkevinKILLspamspamspamCS.ADELAIDE.EDU.AU>
wrote:
> 1) Like most compilers (especially the ones my student's write :-) ) it
> has some bugs

Most *commercial* compilers *don't* have mainstream code
generator bugs with no workaround.  CCS did, as of when when I
cut my losses and switched to HiTech.

> 2) Can't comment on the "efficiency" of the code, but it doesn't look
> too bad
It was pretty good.  It was not good at keeping bank context straight
so did more redundant bank settings that I would like.

> 3) The #use rs232 stuff is wonderful for me

Yes.  Although some of the bugs and limitations were in those
libraries, and so inaccessable.

> 4) The support of 16 bit arithmetic is good, as is the IEEE754 32 bit
> floats.

Yes, that was what I saw, too.

>
> I've used it to generate 1018words of code for a F84 (that was just too
> close) and (from memory) 5Kw of F877 code so it does seem to work.  Some
> people commented last time that it didn't work for large codes, I don't
> seem to have that problem.

No, its fine for large (multi page) CODE.  Its multi bank RAM it
choked on.

The final straw for me was trying to use RAM in the upper banks of
a 16LC76, (their *=16 mode) and the compiler created code that
was just plain wrong ( blew intermediate variables away) AND they
would not support it (no answer to email or phone calls).

Maybe they fixed it since then.  Kevin, can you comment?

Barry.
------------
Barry King, KA1NLH
Engineering Manager
NRG Systems "Measuring the Wind's Energy"
Hinesburg, Vermont, USA
http://www.nrgsystems.com

1999\10\08@145334 by Sean H. Breheny

face picon face
At 02:41 PM 10/8/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Probably from me.  Caveat emptor, and how do you say "what do
>you expect, its cheap?" in latin?
>

Non est sumptuoum, quid expectas? <G>



|
| Sean Breheny
| Amateur Radio Callsign: KA3YXM
| Electrical Engineering Student
\--------------=----------------
Save lives, please look at http://www.all.org
Personal page: http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/shb7
.....shb7spamRemoveMEcornell.edu ICQ #: 3329174

1999\10\08@173817 by Lawrence Lile

flavicon
face
Here's another vote for CCS - I've done some fine work with it -
microstepping stepper motor controllers, nonstandard i2c-like protocols,
crazy stuff.  All of the problems I've had were generated by me.  The
compiler seems to be good quality.


People run it down because it is cheap.

Hey folks, it's not cheap software.  They charge $99 for a compiler that
will program any 12 bit PIC, another $99 for a compiler that will program
the 14 bit PICs, and $99 a year tech support.  The bill just comes in
smaller [sic] bytes [G].  In 3 years you've paid $600, just like the other C
compilers.

You really need both compilers if you are using anything besides a
'54/12C508 etc. etc.

I'd recommend CCS anytime.



{Original Message removed}

1999\10\08@194023 by Kevin J. Maciunas

flavicon
picon face
Barry King wrote:

>
> Most *commercial* compilers *don't* have mainstream code
> generator bugs with no workaround.  CCS did, as of when when I
> cut my losses and switched to HiTech.
>

Beg to differ on this one.  My institution generated the largest number of bug
report's for Digital's VAX/VMS Pascal compiler:-)  Students will feed any old
rubbish into a compiler :-)

>
> > 2) Can't comment on the "efficiency" of the code, but it doesn't look
> > too bad
> It was pretty good.  It was not good at keeping bank context straight
> so did more redundant bank settings that I would like.
>

I looked at the code for the F877 it generated and it seemed pretty reasonable
- typically compiler generated, not immediately obvious.  I thought I found a
code gen error, but in reality it was me not waiting quite long enough for an
LCD to notice me toggling EN.

>
> > 3) The #use rs232 stuff is wonderful for me
>
> Yes.  Although some of the bugs and limitations were in those
> libraries, and so inaccessable.
>

Had zero problems with this stuff so far.  I just wish I'd had the intestinal
fortitude to read the entire manual through before coding - some of the
examples are really useful (they have an LCD driver, for example :-( ).  Seems
like they have improved it a tad since you used it, perhaps.

The irritating thing about these features is the lack of documentation they
give on how they are implemented.  On an F877 do they use
interrupt-on-char-received?  It'd be nice to know!  [Are you guys listening?]

{Quote hidden}

Well, my F877 code used well over 128 bytes of RAM - so it must have been
multi-bank?  When my new compiler arrives, I'll have a play and post something
back, but since I live where I do, mail from the US takes a wee while to get
here :-)

I hasten to add, I have no association with CCS (other than being a
customer).  This compiler and Don's DT101 boards make using naked PICs as easy
as a Stamp.  Really simple, quick turn around and well suited to MY use.  You
guys who hack this stuff for a living may well have different experiences, I
have never called on any Tech Support from CCS (tho' it seems to be available,
from what they say on their web site).

/Kevin

--
-----------
Kevin J. Maciunas           Net: RemoveMEkevinspamspamBeGonecs.adelaide.edu.au
Dept. of Computer Science   Ph : +61 8 8303 5845
University of Adelaide      Fax: +61 8 8303 4366
Adelaide 5005
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

1999\10\10@194520 by Dennis Plunkett

flavicon
face
At 14:50 8/10/99 -0400, you wrote:
>At 02:41 PM 10/8/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>Probably from me.  Caveat emptor, and how do you say "what do
>>you expect, its cheap?" in latin?
>>
>
>Non est sumptuoum, quid expectas? <G>
>

Subarashi!
Sean


Dennis

{Quote hidden}

1999\10\11@145508 by Jason Mielke

flavicon
face
part 0 2265 bytes
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>

</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=87595518-11101999><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2>Has
anybody used the Fed C compiler?&nbsp; It looks kinda
interesting.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=87595518-11101999><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=87595518-11101999><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2>Jay
Mielke</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
   <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader><FONT face="Times New Roman"
   size=2>{Original Message removed}

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1999 , 2000 only
- Today
- New search...