Searching \ for 'PIC ICD' 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/microchip/devprogs.htm?key=icd
Search entire site for: 'PIC ICD'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'PIC ICD'
2000\05\25@075933 by Andrej Vuga

flavicon
face
Hello!

I'm thinking of buying a MPLAB ICD (in circuit debugger), because I want to debug code for 16F873.
Does enybody remember, which PIC microcontrollers does the package contain (which chips do you receive in the package).

I'm asking this because in the Microchip aplication note 51184b.pdf (page 23 of the manual) it's written, that for emulating the 16F873 you need a 16F874 attached to the header.

Thanks for the answer
Andrej Vuga

_______________________________________________________________________

Why pay when you don't have to? Get AltaVista Free Internet Access now!
http://jump.altavista.com/freeaccess4.go

_______________________________________________________________________

2000\05\25@092603 by James Paul

flavicon
face
Andrej,

The ICD comes with a 16F877, but you can emulate almost any lower
part by using only those peripheral modules included with the lower
part.  I've used the ICD to develop code for the 877, the F84, and
even the C672 and other 8 pin parts.

                                         Regards,

                                           Jim




On Thu, 25 May 2000, Andrej Vuga wrote:

{Quote hidden}

spam_OUTjimTakeThisOuTspamjpes.com

2000\05\25@092607 by James Paul

flavicon
face
Andrej,

The ICD comes with a 16F877, but you can emulate almost any lower
part by using only those peripheral modules included with the lower
part.  I've used the ICD to develop code for the 877, the F84, and
even the C672 and other 8 pin parts.

                                         Regards,

                                           Jim




On Thu, 25 May 2000, Andrej Vuga wrote:

{Quote hidden}

.....jimKILLspamspam@spam@jpes.com

2000\05\25@111730 by mike

flavicon
face
On Thu, 25 May 2000 06:24:42 -0700, you wrote:

> Andrej,
>
> The ICD comes with a 16F877, but you can emulate almost any lower
> part by using only those peripheral modules included with the lower
> part.  I've used the ICD to develop code for the 877, the F84, and
> even the C672 and other 8 pin parts.
But this is not always the case - if you're using RAM locations in
upper banks, e.g. on the 874 - it is significantly different on the
877.
An '874, however is a suitable development platform for many of the
other 16cxx devices, so it's useful to have an '874 and and '877 to
hand.

2000\05\25@125832 by James Paul

flavicon
face
All,


What Mike says makes sense, but I cannot argue one way or the other
because I haven't tried it.  I've only used the F877 to emulate
other processors.  I try to get the memory placement as close as
possible to the chip I'm trying to emulate.   And when I do emulate
a lower processor, I limit my memory usage to the amount on the
processor I'm emulating.  This only makes sense and is basically
what I stated in my original post.  And that is to use only the
peripheral modules that the processor you are trying to emulate on
the 877.  And this includes memory.  I thought that went without
saying.  I guess not.  So if you are emulating a lower part that
has, say, 1K of memory, then on the 877, don't use more than 1K of
memory.
Granted, my method does not give a 100% emulation of the other parts,
but it is close enough that I can usually develop my code and get it
to work in the target processor with very little further debugging.

I usually do what works for me, and saves me trouble.   Using only
the 877 seems to have saved me trouble so far in that I have only
one processor to concern myself with, and as such, I have become
rather profecient with my method.   This is not to say that there
aren't other, and possibly better, ways of doing this.  But I'm
comfortable doing it the way I'm doing it, so I'll go that way.


                                          Regards,

                                            Jim






On Thu, 25 May 2000, Mike Harrison wrote:

{Quote hidden}

jimspamKILLspamjpes.com

2000\05\25@144621 by Quentin

flavicon
face
Can anybody say synchronicity?
On my way back from a customer today I was thinking the same thing. He
needed a quick fix for a simple problem and I reckoned a 12C508 will do
the job just fine, ready by tomorrow. Not being in the mood for pipe
lining a few 12C508 JW's through the mill, I though why not use ICD with
the F877 to develop and then convert for the 12C508.
I "INCLUDE" another .inc file in my main .ASM in which I declared my
registers for the F877 and use "#DEFINE" for the I/O bits and flags.
After testing my code on the ICD demo board I copied the main body over
to an 12C508 template. All I had to do was to rewrite the .inc file and
Voila!, 3 hours later I had a working 12C508, much quicker than pipe
lining JW devices would give me.
So this got me thinking that this type of development has some valid
points and if time permits me, I will look into developing a standard
for myself doing this kinda thing in the future with other (non ICD)
PICs.
Anybody up for the challenge?

Quentin

2000\05\25@145838 by jamesnewton

face picon face
I would love to post (to
http://www.piclist.com
) a conditional assembly template that allows development on '877 then one
define change and compile for target. Please let me know if you make such a
thing and wish to release it.

---
James Newton (PICList Admin #3)
.....jamesnewtonKILLspamspam.....piclist.com 1-619-652-0593
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com or .org

{Original Message removed}

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2000 , 2001 only
- Today
- New search...