| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
0xDEADBEEF
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 8
|
| Internal Compilier Error +DF |
 Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:28 pm |
 |
|
I recently encountered this problem as described here:
http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:IbTobleev0cJ:www.hcilab.org/resources/ccsc/ccsc-howto.htm+%22Internal%20Compiler%20Error%22+%22Internal+error%22+%22contact+ccs+output+file%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=firefox-a
| Quote: | Internal Compiler Error
Sometimes (or frequently) when you create large projects with lots of included files and headers, the CCSC Compiler escapes with the following (or a similar) error message:
Executing: "C:\Program files\PICC\CCSC.exe" "template.c" +FH +LN +T -A +M +Z +Y=9 +EA I="C:\PROGRAM FILES\PICC\devices;C:\PROGRAM FILES\PICC\drivers;C:\svn\Particles"
--- Info 300 "C:\svn\Particles\applications\template\template.c" Line 119(0,1): More info: Access violation at address 011992B2 in module 'PCH.DLL'. Read of address 01E01882
*** Error 44 "C:\svn\Particles\applications\template\template.c" Line 119(0,1): Internal Error - Contact CCS OUTPUT FILE O
Halting build on first failure as requested. BUILD FAILED: Wed Feb 09 13:15:12 2005
Despite of the compiler error message, the .HEX File is generated.
When you experience this failure message, you can try to move some source code around. Sometimes adding a useless line of code or a variable helps.
A more convenient solution may be removing the '+DF' from the command line (or the build options in MPLAB, see our MPLAB How-To on how to enter build options). The '+DF' turns on the generation of a COFF Debug file. It seems to us that during this generation the compiler somewhere makes mistakes. |
Has this been fixed on the latest version compiler?
I am running 3.224. We have the latest version here at work but I have not yet installed it on my machine as I don't like changing compiler versions in the middle of a project. |
|
 |
PCM programmer
Joined: 06 Sep 2003
Posts: 21708
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 1:32 pm |
|
|
If you have access to the latest version (4.023), then you also have
access to the last of vs. 3, which is 3.249. Download that one and try it. |
|
|
0xDEADBEEF
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 8
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 1:53 pm |
|
|
So I suppose I should take that to mean "maybe"?
Is there a set of release notes that details what bugs were addressed with each version?
This page only seems to outline changes made to the 4.x versions:
http://www.ccsinfo.com/devices.php?page=versioninfo
And it does not give very good detail as to what the bugs were:
| Quote: | | 4.009 An internal error message is now fixed |
Is this the same internal error that I encountered? |
|
|
PCM programmer
Joined: 06 Sep 2003
Posts: 21708
|
|
|
0xDEADBEEF
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 8
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:26 pm |
|
|
You have got to be kidding me. I have to use an internet archive to pull up information on a compiler version that is currently available for download on the website?
http://www.ccsinfo.com/compilerupdates.php
Ok, fine I can pull up version info from the internet archive, but is there any more detail available into the specifics of the bugs addressed?
Bug entries like this:
| Quote: | | 3.162 A problem with error reporting and sometimes a compiler hang is fixed |
| Quote: | | 3.174 Error reporting has been improved |
| Quote: | | 3.185 Error reporting has been improved |
do not really tell me anything useful. Don't you use bugzilla or something similar to track bugs?
I don't feel that "upgrade & pray" is a sensible option. |
|
|
PCM programmer
Joined: 06 Sep 2003
Posts: 21708
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:49 pm |
|
|
I don't work for CCS. I'm just trying to be helpful. If you've got
a beef, email CCS about it. |
|
|
dyeatman
Joined: 06 Sep 2003
Posts: 1933
Location: Norman, OK
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:53 pm |
|
|
First of all you are NOT talking to CCS...
This is a user forum and CCS does not live here. Every once in a while
they check in but they don't monitor this forum. Please don't give PCM fits,
I expect he likely agrees with you!
If you wish to holler at them send them an email or call them.
Many of us have said the same thing as you are saying to no avail. As to
whether you can make any headway with CCS all I can say is Good Luck!
dave
EDIT: It looks like you beat me by a few minutes PCM! |
|
|
0xDEADBEEF
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 8
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:57 pm |
|
|
| PCM programmer wrote: | | I don't work for CCS. |
I see. Then your username is quite misleading, don't you think?
If you truly were a "PCM programmer" then you would be a programmer who actually worked on PCM, would you not? |
|
|
PCM programmer
Joined: 06 Sep 2003
Posts: 21708
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:04 pm |
|
|
No. I'm someone who bought the PCM compiler many years ago, and
I joined the forum when it was practically dead. Posts would sit there
for a week with no answers. I decided to try to improve that situation.
I think it's a good idea to remain anonymous on the net, so since I had
the PCM compiler, I just decided to name myself 'PCM programmer'. |
|
|
0xDEADBEEF
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 8
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:05 pm |
|
|
| dyeatman wrote: | First of all you are NOT talking to CCS...
This is a user forum and CCS does not live here. Every once in a while
they check in but they don't monitor this forum. Please don't give PCM fits,
I expect he likely agrees with you!
If you wish to holler at them send them an email or call them.
Many of us have said the same thing as you are saying to no avail. As to
whether you can make any headway with CCS all I can say is Good Luck!
dave
EDIT: It looks like you beat me by a few minutes PCM! |
I realize this is a user forum. I was just mislead by his username. If you went to support forum for Microsoft, and someone on the forum had the username of "Visual Studio Programmer" or "WINXP Programmer" you would have thought the same thing.
For the record. The decision over which compiler to use on my project was not made by me.
My previous PIC18 experience was was on HI-TECH's compiler (which I prefer to CCS). |
|
|
0xDEADBEEF
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 8
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:07 pm |
|
|
| PCM programmer wrote: | No. I'm someone who bought the PCM compiler many years ago, and
I joined the forum when it was practically dead. Posts would sit there
for a week with no answers. I decided to try to improve that situation.
I think it's a good idea to remain anonymous on the net, so since I had
the PCM compiler, I just decided to name myself 'PCM programmer'. |
I appreciate your contribution, Programmer who uses PCM. |
|
|
dyeatman
Joined: 06 Sep 2003
Posts: 1933
Location: Norman, OK
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:52 pm |
|
|
| Quote: | For the record. The decision over which compiler to use on my project was not made by me.
My previous PIC18 experience was was on HI-TECH's compiler (which I prefer to CCS). |
Interestingly enough I also started with HiTech. In my case I eventually came to regard CCS as superior in many ways. Not that CCS doesn't have their failings...:-)
I especially came to appreciate, for rapid application development, all the drivers they provide, isr handling, memory handling, bank switching, etc. It was a lot faster to me to have a "framework" to start with than figuring it out from scratch.
I admit to being bitten by a few gotchas by CCS over the years but so far, nothing I couldn't work around. They have come a long way in many respects from a few years ago.
Regards |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in
