gnupic: Re: Linux and C compilers for Microchip PIC
Subject:
Re: FW: Linux and C compilers for Microchip PIC
From:
####@####.####
Date:
13 Aug 2005 14:02:38 +0100
Message-Id:
Chen Xiao Fan wrote:
> > CCS has a version for Linux as well but I am not so sure about
> > the quality and the price.
David McNab wrote:
> Price is a quarter of that for hitech picc, and quality is excellent, in
> terms of fast accurate and very compact code. It's improvisations might
> offend some C purists though.
>
> > SDCC is catching up, but it is much more mature for the PIC18F
> > than the PIC16F. I think it is a good option to use SDCC and
> > PIC18F for hobbyists on Linux if Wine is too troublesome. It is
> > said that PIC18F is much better to use than PIC16F even though
> > I have very limited experience with PIC18F.
>
> From what I've seen, sdcc has a long way to go in terms of the quality
> of the code generator - it's presently generating much larger code than
> CCS does.
>
How does picforth compare for size, for 'simple utilities' i.e. without
task-swapping and multi-byte arithmetic ?
> > If Wine is an option, then I think MPLAB C18 with PIC18F is a
> > good option as well. They have the Student version for free.
>
> Depends on the limitations in the student version.
>
> Oh, and by the way, 18F is way better, 16F is best avoided unless one
> has major part cost constraints.
>
What's the page-swapping situation with these 16F & 18F versions ?
What can dsPIC's do ?
What's the point of using a PIC other than for SSI [18 pin max] jobs,
when a proper/mature uC with proper/mature development
software is available ?
Thanks for any info - as you can see, I'm not up to date ;-)
== Chris Glur.
