Post by thread:Newbie: Which PIC emulator to use?

We are a small R&D company. We are in the process of buying an Emulator and C compiler for PIC uP's. Is it worth paying heaps more for the PICMASTER system or is the Advanced Transdata RICE the one to buy? Any strong opinions of choice of C compiler? Thanks Paul Gaastra spam_OUTpgaastraTakeThisOuThort.cri.nz Technology Development Group, Hort Research Private Bag 3123 fax +64 7 8584705 Hamilton, NEW ZEALAND phone +64 7 8584745

Don't buy C compilers - they all are shit :(

On 10 Mar 98 at 13:45, Ints Mikelsons wrote: > Don't buy C compilers - they all are shit :( My experience with the CCS compiler is quite good, at least from a hobbyists viewpoint. Wolfgang -- Rund um's Geld: people.frankfurt.netsurf.de/Wolfgang.Kynast/

Ints Mikelsons wrote: > > Don't buy C compilers - they all are shit :( DATAshit???? or DATAbook??? Miguel.

At 03:22 PM 3/10/98 +1200, you wrote: >We are a small R&D company. We are in the process of buying an >Emulator and C compiler for PIC uP's. Is it worth paying heaps more >for the PICMASTER system or is the Advanced Transdata RICE the one to >buy? I've used both and I strongly prefer the RICE to the PICMASTER for the following reasons: 1) The RICE17A can be run at 3.2 volts. This mode is unsupported by microchip, and the timers do not work at this voltage, but for emulating non-timer related code in low voltage products, this is your only choice. The picmaster will supply its own 5v or accept your design's 5V supply, but will not work at any other voltage. 2) The Rice 17A works from the parallel port. You don't have to open your case or find free i/o space to install it. 3) The RICE17A drivers are now available for Windows NT. 4) The case is smaller, the cable is thinner, and the whole package less unwieldy (more wieldy?) than the picmaster. 5) The cost is less. This shouldn't be your primary concern, but it is always nice when the best product costs the least. >Any strong opinions of choice of C compiler? I've used CCS and Bytecraft. I haven't used Hi-Tech. CCS supports a floating-point type and inlining (manual or automatic) of functions, which Bytecraft does not, so, again, you get more for less. I understand that Hi-Tech support floating point, but don't know about inlining. The command-line version of the CCS compiler is $99. Bart ====Bart Addis==================================================== Software Engineering/Hardware Design Voice 610-974-8870, Fax 8890 ====.....bartKILLspam@spam@fast.net=================================================>

part 0 319 bytes -----Original Message----- From: WF AUTOMACAO [SMTP:wfKILLspamAMBIENTE.COM.BR] Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 1998 11:00 AM To: .....PICLISTKILLspam.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: Newbie: Which PIC emulator to use? Ints Mikelsons wrote: > > Don't buy C compilers - they all are shit :( DATAshit???? or DATAbook??? Miguel.

Bart Addis wrote: > At 03:22 PM 3/10/98 +1200, you wrote: > > >We are a small R&D company. We are in the process of buying an > >Emulator and C compiler for PIC uP's. Is it worth paying heaps more > >for the PICMASTER system or is the Advanced Transdata RICE the one to > >buy? > > I've used both and I strongly prefer the RICE to the PICMASTER for the > following reasons: > > 1) The RICE17A can be run at 3.2 volts. This mode is unsupported > by microchip, and the timers do not work at this voltage, but > for emulating non-timer related code in low voltage products, this > is your only choice. The picmaster will supply its own 5v or > accept your design's 5V supply, but will not work at any other > voltage. Very good point. > 2) The Rice 17A works from the parallel port. You don't have to > open your case or find free i/o space to install it. Another good point. > 3) The RICE17A drivers are now available for Windows NT. And another > 4) The case is smaller, the cable is thinner, and the whole package > less unwieldy (more wieldy?) than the picmaster. And another > 5) The cost is less. This shouldn't be your primary concern, but > it is always nice when the best product costs the least. And another. Here's my $0.02 : The best emulator in the world won't help much if it is broken. I've an ICEPIC and a PICmaster, and whilst the ICEPIC is also an excellent emulator and the service is good, the service provided for the PICmaster is incredible (here, at least). If I have a problem, it is fixed in *hours*, not days, weeks, or months. Before you buy an emulator, work out how much money you can lose in a week if you do something stupid with the emulator. Ask your Mchip distributor (not the factory reps, who wouldn't be interested in you anyway) what the turnaround time for a repair on the PICmaster is. > >Any strong opinions of choice of C compiler? > > I've used CCS and Bytecraft. I haven't used Hi-Tech. CCS supports a > floating-point type and inlining (manual or automatic) of functions, which > Bytecraft does not, so, again, you get more for less. I understand that > Hi-Tech support floating point, but don't know about inlining. The > command-line version of the CCS compiler is $99. Again, MPC is the *only* single compiler that supports *all* the PICsand works well in MPLAB without workarounds. The price difference is recouped quickly if you take into account all the time spent on finger troubles every time you switch to a new project. But there will still be as many opinions as list members, which is as it should be. -- Friendly Regards Tjaart van der Walt EraseMEtjaartspam_OUTTakeThisOuTwasp.co.za _____________________________________________________________ | WASP International http://www.wasp.co.za/~tjaart/index.html | | R&D Engineer : GSM peripheral services development | | Vehicle tracking | Telemetry systems | GSM data transfer | | Voice : +27-(0)11-622-8686 | Fax : +27-(0)11-622-8973 | | WGS-84 : 26¡10.52'S 28¡06.19'E | |_____________________________________________________________|

In a message dated 98-03-09 21:34:03 EST, you write: << We are a small R&D company. We are in the process of buying an Emulator and C compiler for PIC uP's. Is it worth paying heaps more for the PICMASTER system or is the Advanced Transdata RICE the one to buy? Any strong opinions of choice of C compiler? Thanks Paul Gaastra pgaastraspam_OUThort.cri.nz >> I have used the CCS PIC C compiler and the Hi-Tech PIC C compiler with success. I use the ClearView Mathias emulator from Tech Tools, it works well for my applications. The newest upgrade to the software is alot better than the previous version. Hope this helps. Allan @spam@AllanJHKILLspamaol.com

Interesting comments on the Rice emulator. Any idea on cost for the Rice emulator?

At 07:18 AM 3/11/98 -0500, you wrote: >Interesting comments on the Rice emulator. Any idea on cost for the Rice >emulator? $550 for RICE17A plus about $300 for each probe. See http://www.adv-transdata.com/order.html Regards, Bart ====Bart Addis==================================================== Software Engineering/Hardware Design Voice 610-974-8870, Fax 8890 ====KILLspambartKILLspamfast.net=================================================>

At 07:32 AM 3/11/98 +0200, you wrote: >whilst the ICEPIC is also an excellent >emulator and the service is good, the service provided for the PICmaster >is incredible (here, at least). Yes. I should have mentioned this. If you have a relationship with a local uChip distributor, you can get much better service from them. Advanced Transdata gladly turned around my last repair in a day, and sent it by fedex, but it still took 2 days because they're in Texas. If those 2 days matter to you, then call your local distributor and see what they can promise. BTW, to bridge this kind of emergency, and just to validate stuff like power-on sequences and chip-to-chip variations, you should always have a handful of JW (ceramic, windowed) parts even if you have an emulator. Although it is not specified, about 80% of them (16c74a-jw, at least) work correctly with sub-5v supplies. Microchip's low-voltage parts (16LC74a) are just normal parts binned according to their tolerance of low voltage supplies. Or maybe the normal parts are binned according to their non-tolerance ? :-) >Again, MPC is the *only* single compiler that supports *all* the PICsand works >well in MPLAB without workarounds. The price difference >is recouped quickly if you take into account all the time spent on finger >troubles every time you switch to a new project. Yes. Good point. I agree. Note that MPC is a microchip-supplied-and-modified version of the Bytecraft compiler, which has now diverged from the original, although its still pretty close. If you're using absolutely new chips from Microchip, then you are forced to use picmaster/picstart/mpc because they are the reference tools. In my experience, both CCS and Bytecraft supported the latest new chip I needed (16c77) at the same time, about the time that it became generally available, August '97. But note that CCS did so with their shipping version (2.459), and Bytecraft supplied a beta version (1.3 beta) that is _still_ not available except by special request! The picstart and picmaster supported the chip as soon as I could get part samples from microchip in early '97, so although I don't use MPC I assume support was immediate. Note that Microchip's preference of the PCM/Bytecraft compiler has changed recently (from http://www.microchip.com/promos/hitech.html): >Microchip recommends the HI-TECH PICC compiler as the preferred compiler >solution for the PIC16Cxx mid-range (14-bit instruction) family products. Both >Microchip and HI-TECH will provide technical assistance on the PICC >compiler. Any Hi-Tech users out there want to comment on support of new chips, etc? >But there will still be as many opinions as list members, which is as it >should be. Agreed. :-) Regards, Bart ====Bart Addis==================================================== Software Engineering/Hardware Design Voice 610-974-8870, Fax 8890 ====RemoveMEbartTakeThisOuTfast.net=================================================>

In a message dated 98-03-09 21:34:03 EST, you write: << We are a small R&D company. We are in the process of buying an Emulator and C compiler for PIC uP's. Is it worth paying heaps more for the PICMASTER system or is the Advanced Transdata RICE the one to buy? Any strong opinions of choice of C compiler? Thanks >> I have used the CCS and Hi-Tech compiler with success. I currently use the ClearView Mathias emulator from TechTools, it works well for my applications. Allan spamBeGoneAllanJHspamBeGoneaol.com

>From: Ints Mikelsons <TakeThisOuTmintsEraseMEspam_OUTEDZI.LZA.LV> > Don't buy C compilers - they all are shit :( Why ???? There are many projects, that can be realised in C, and more quicly then in assembler. By the way, most of C-compilers prodused ASM-listing, and it is possible to edit it "by hands" to increase speed or decrease length of code. As to me - Hi-Tech C compiler is very good, unfortunately i can't buy it and try only evaluation copy. Alex Torres, Kharkov, Ukraine (exUSSR) RemoveMEaltorTakeThisOuTchat.ru 2:461/28@FidoNet www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/6311