Prev: AVR32 destiny or destination (Ulf Samuelsson RSVP)
Next: Graphical User Interface project on Spartan-3 FPGA
From: Meindert Sprang on 31 May 2010 07:07
Hi Guru's,

I have been handed a PIC18 project including a CCS compiler. I have been
struggling for days now to try to work around something that seems to be a
compiler bug but CCS have not been very helpful to solve this project. To be
honest, this whole CCS thing seems to be targeted at embedded-challenged
people and many pre-cooked things and the almost impossibility to devide a
project in several C files are getting seriously in the way of an
experienced developer.....

I am now considering buying a decent C compiler and I'd like to have some
opinions of you guys. I am opting between IAR, Hi-Tech and SourceBoost. Any
comments and/or suggestions?

Regards,
Meindert


From: larwe on 31 May 2010 08:56
On May 31, 7:07 am, "Meindert Sprang" <m...(a)NOJUNKcustomORSPAMware.nl>
wrote:

> I am now considering buying a decent C compiler and I'd like to have some
> opinions of you guys. I am opting between IAR, Hi-Tech and SourceBoost. Any
> comments and/or suggestions?

Well, firstly - the architecture sucks (for smaller devices) so don't
expect any compiler to be wart-free. I use CCS's tiny tiny software
for a couple of designs that should be written in asm but need to be
supported by people who only speak C, and it's about as painful/
painless as I would expect for a compiler for such a horrifyingly
dismal core.

Having said all this random nonsense, I'd vote for Hi-Tech. Partly
because we use them at work and they are at least approachable for
support. But mainly because Microchip owns them now, and I would
expect they will be the most up to date looking forward.
From: Mel on 31 May 2010 09:07
Meindert Sprang wrote:

> I am now considering buying a decent C compiler and I'd like to have some
> opinions of you guys. I am opting between IAR, Hi-Tech and SourceBoost.
> Any comments and/or suggestions?

Sourceboost is cheap. A client uses it for their products and they have no
complaints. The only non-standard aspect I've run into is that sizeof is
implemented as though it were a function, so parentheses are required
always. I actually got them into SourceBoost when another consultant moved
on and left them compilerless. For $150 we could keep on developing while
we reviewed their options.

Mel.


From: Chris H on 31 May 2010 11:36
In message <4c0398f8$0$22933$e4fe514c(a)news.xs4all.nl>, Meindert Sprang
<ms(a)NOJUNKcustomORSPAMware.nl> writes
>Hi Guru's,
>
>I have been handed a PIC18 project including a CCS compiler. I have been
>struggling for days now to try to work around something that seems to be a
>compiler bug but CCS have not been very helpful to solve this project. To be
>honest, this whole CCS thing seems to be targeted at embedded-challenged
>people and many pre-cooked things and the almost impossibility to devide a
>project in several C files are getting seriously in the way of an
>experienced developer.....
>
>I am now considering buying a decent C compiler and I'd like to have some
>opinions of you guys. I am opting between IAR, Hi-Tech and SourceBoost. Any
>comments and/or suggestions?

It depends on the project.

Hi-Tech went bust and were bought by Microchip. Their compilers were not
bad but not brilliant either.

IAR are expensive but a very good compiler.

There are few professional standard tools for the PIC18 other than the
IAR because of the problems over the PIC16. So it depends on the nature
of the project. If there is any safety or high reliability involved IAR.

If it is a consumer or low cost type device Hi-Tech should suffice.
Microchip can not afford to let these compilers sink.

I have no idea about the SourceBoost


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



From: Neil on 31 May 2010 12:45
On 5/31/2010 11:36 AM, Chris H wrote:
> In message<4c0398f8$0$22933$e4fe514c(a)news.xs4all.nl>, Meindert Sprang
> <ms(a)NOJUNKcustomORSPAMware.nl> writes
>> Hi Guru's,
>>
>> I have been handed a PIC18 project including a CCS compiler. I have been
>> struggling for days now to try to work around something that seems to be a
>> compiler bug but CCS have not been very helpful to solve this project. To be
>> honest, this whole CCS thing seems to be targeted at embedded-challenged
>> people and many pre-cooked things and the almost impossibility to devide a
>> project in several C files are getting seriously in the way of an
>> experienced developer.....
>>
>> I am now considering buying a decent C compiler and I'd like to have some
>> opinions of you guys. I am opting between IAR, Hi-Tech and SourceBoost. Any
>> comments and/or suggestions?
>
> It depends on the project.
>
> Hi-Tech went bust and were bought by Microchip. Their compilers were not
> bad but not brilliant either.
>
> IAR are expensive but a very good compiler.
>
> There are few professional standard tools for the PIC18 other than the
> IAR because of the problems over the PIC16. So it depends on the nature
> of the project. If there is any safety or high reliability involved IAR.
>
> If it is a consumer or low cost type device Hi-Tech should suffice.
> Microchip can not afford to let these compilers sink.
>
> I have no idea about the SourceBoost
>
>
I did not know Hi-tech when Bust.
They actual where better before Microchip bought them. Faster updates
and bug fixes. It is not a cheap compiler, but it has a free and eval
version. I use the older ones with no problems. I am using the New Lite
version as a test on a new program. So far so good.

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: AVR32 destiny or destination (Ulf Samuelsson RSVP)
Next: Graphical User Interface project on Spartan-3 FPGA