View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Jeff King
Joined: 20 Oct 2003 Posts: 43 Location: Hillsdale, Michigan USA
|
PCWHD (PIC24) in a production enviroment |
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 5:40 am |
|
|
Hello:
I've used PCWH (PIC18) CCS in a product environment, and had reasonably good luck with it. Last I looked on the forum for PCWHD (PIC24) it didn't seem quite ready for prime time.
Beyond the normal CCS gotcha's, is anyone using PCWHD (PIC24) CCS compiler in a production environment yet and are you reasonably happy with it?
Thanks
Jeff |
|
|
temtronic
Joined: 01 Jul 2010 Posts: 9221 Location: Greensville,Ontario
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 6:27 am |
|
|
Have to ask, is there something 'special' about the 24 series that you really can't do with the 18 series PICs? |
|
|
Jeff King
Joined: 20 Oct 2003 Posts: 43 Location: Hillsdale, Michigan USA
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 6:29 am |
|
|
Yes, they wanted USB on the Go. Any thoughts on the PIC24 version of CCS? |
|
|
bkamen
Joined: 07 Jan 2004 Posts: 1615 Location: Central Illinois, USA
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 7:02 am |
|
|
I suppose it depends on what you're doing with PIC24 (in terms of code complexity)...
Another consideration is that Microchip has some pretty extensive libraries that don't compile so well for PCD. If MCHP library use is in that future, I would consider C30 from Mchip.
PCD isn't too bad otherwise, but some might argue (including me) that it's not quite there yet.
I've run into some pretty dumb bugs as have others. Nothing I've never been able to work around for the moment --- and eventually have fixed by the CCS folks... but... it is what it is.
So with that..
YMMV,
-Ben _________________ Dazed and confused? I don't think so. Just "plain lost" will do. :D |
|
|
Jeff King
Joined: 20 Oct 2003 Posts: 43 Location: Hillsdale, Michigan USA
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 7:06 am |
|
|
Yes, the "not too bad" is what I was looking for. I like CCS over the MicroChip product as in general, I seem more productive with CCS. But it does have to do the job.
I just seemed to realize they (CCS) may not have USB OTG support yet. I have a query into them on that. |
|
|
Jeff King
Joined: 20 Oct 2003 Posts: 43 Location: Hillsdale, Michigan USA
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:04 pm |
|
|
Here is my response from CCS on if they had OTG/Host mode examples. Unfortunately, it appears to be the same answer that was re-posted on this forum ~11 months ago.
----
We don't have any examples or code to do this.
It should not be hard to port Microchip's code to CCS. This is something I have on my table, I just don't have an ETA for doing this. We are always adding better out-of-the box support for elements in Microchip's C18 and C30 compiler, which is why it shouldn't be hard to port it.
Thanks,
CCS |
|
|
bkamen
Joined: 07 Jan 2004 Posts: 1615 Location: Central Illinois, USA
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:28 pm |
|
|
Jeff King wrote: | Yes, the "not too bad" is what I was looking for. I like CCS over the MicroChip product as in general, I seem more productive with CCS. But it does have to do the job.
I just seemed to realize they (CCS) may not have USB OTG support yet. I have a query into them on that. |
I've been teaching a friend of mine to program on micro's and hearing his rants on why some things are so hard in C18 is funny... I told him as I've said here (and to others many times)...
CCS is nice --- it can save a lot of time. When a function doesn't work like you expect, you don't use the function and just end up writing one yourself -- just like you'd have to do in C18 by default.
C30 is pretty much the same.
I have PCHWD, C18 & C30 & C32...
I still prefer CCS when I can use it. _________________ Dazed and confused? I don't think so. Just "plain lost" will do. :D |
|
|
Douglas Kennedy
Joined: 07 Sep 2003 Posts: 755 Location: Florida
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 4:48 pm |
|
|
PCWHD had teething problems.....it seems to have been stable for a while now. You if you look at the microchip forums you'll see a bunch of issues. I'm having some pretty sloppy issues with Microchip's WDS. Sure they'll fix it next release maybe several months away. CCS has issues as well .... the complaint some have is CCS fixes things too quickly making you could say most releases beta versions. Many of us kind of know this so we keep older versions and often save the compiler in the production release just in case of regression. Not that bad a technique in any case especially since we have DVD writers and 1TB disks. |
|
|
|