gnupic: Re: [gnupic] GCC port of PIC
Subject:
Re: [gnupic] GCC port of PIC
From:
bill sack ####@####.####
Date:
16 Mar 2006 20:19:18 +0000
Message-Id: <4419C848.30407@buffalo.edu>
i vote for starting with the 14 bit pics - they're still used a lot in
academic situations and for small, cheap sensors and controllers, yeah?
there's an active port of gcc for atmel devices but don't know that much
about it. any lessons to be learned from it?
b
Colm O' Flaherty wrote:
> Hmm. 2:1 so far.. :) Does anyone else have any thoughts on it?
>
> Does anyone have any experience developing a port for gcc?
>
> If we got something basic up and running, and then put it on
> sourceforge, I guess we'd find out fairly quickly where the issues
> were, and what support people wanted, as people started to use it.
>
> Colm
>
>> From: "George M. Gallant, Jr." ####@####.####
>> Reply-To: ####@####.####
>> To: ####@####.####
>> Subject: Re: [gnupic] GCC port of PIC
>> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 11:19:29 -0500
>>
>> Having both flavors I vote for 16bit only. Also would consider using the
>> newer chips with
>> the extended instruction set.
>>
>> George
>>
>> On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 16:08 +0000, Colm O' Flaherty wrote:
>>
>> > There are still a lot of 14 bit PICs out there though (I still only
>> use 14
>> > bit PICs).. and if we make mistakes with the GCC implementation,
>> I'd rather
>> > make them with the 14 bit port, than with the 16 bit port..
>> >
>> > Once the 14 bit port is running, a 16 bit port should be a
>> reasonably easy
>> > migration. On the other hand, if we start with the 16 bit port,
>> we'll never
>> > develop a 14 bit port.. :)
>> >
>> > I'd like to see what everyone else thinks though.. Are people
>> migrating off
>> > 14 bit PICs, or are they still being used?
>> >
>> > As for Java.. I agree, don't think it would be too useful on the 14
>> bit, but
>> > maybe on the higher-end 16 bit chips, it might be useful.. (it's an
>> > interesting academic exercise to compile Java for PIC, if nothing
>> else :)
>> > ) It comes for free anyway if we develop the PIC backend, so
>> wheres the
>> > disadvantage? Having C/C++ for PIC out of the box on Linux (via
>> GCC) is a
>> > bit of a dream.. I'm surprised it hasn't been done already..
>> >
>> > Colm
>> >
>> > >From: "Xiaofan Chen" ####@####.####
>> > >Reply-To: ####@####.####
>> > >To: ####@####.####
>> > >Subject: Re: [gnupic] GCC port of PIC
>> > >Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:46:32 +0800
>> > >
>> > >GCC port for 14 bit PICsHInteresting. Maybe it is better to start
>> with
>> > >16-bit
>> > >PICs (18F). I think PIC18F are now getting more and more popular.
>> > >
>> > >We can still use assembly for 14-bit PICs even though something like
>> > >HiTech PICC is really good to have (but it is not free and rather
>> > >expensive).
>> > >
>> > >Do we need Java for PIC? ;-)
>> > >
>> > >Regards,
>> > >Xiaofan
>> > >
>> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
>> > >For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####
>> >
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
> For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####
>
>
>
