Ohhhh! Wow! Listen! I've just got to find a way to get this across... This is EXACTLY what piclist.com EXISTS FOR! If you write these notes about your experience, traps that you've found how to avoid, etc... in your manuals, on sticky notes, or (god forbid) just try to remember them, you are doing your community (and yourself) a grand disservice. A) You will forget or loose the notes B) No one else will benefit from your experience and you will not benefit from theirs C) the Manufacturer will not benefit (or be chastised) from the information. Even if you warn them, it is easy to ignore when its not posted on a public web site somewhere. If you would just sign up for the techref you can post these notes yourself DIRECTLY to the web page for CCS PIC C at http://www.piclist.com/../microchip/language/c/ccs or (for non-JavaScript's) at http://www.piclist.com/techref/default.asp?url=microchip/language/c/ccs or if you want, just email them to me or post them to the PICList and I will try to get them all in. If you do use the form on the web site directly: A) Don't stress if it doesn't come out formatted just right, I review and edit each posting and will fix any problems B) keep in mind you are posting HTML, so please do use bold and put 
(code goes here)
around your code and the like. And while your at it, send me some C code for the PICList.com C routine library... http://www.piclist.com/../microchip/language/c http://www.piclist.com/techref/default.asp?url=microchip/language/c ...its still pretty sad compared to the ASM library at http://www.piclist.com/../microchip/routines http://www.piclist.com/techref/default.asp?url=microchip/routines --- James Newton (PICList Admin #3) mailto:jamesnewton@piclist.com 1-619-652-0593 PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com or .org -----Original Message----- From: pic microcontroller discussion list [mailto:PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of David Kott Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 04:25 To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: [OT]: CCS C? > > >From a usage and operational standpoint, I sure do wish they would > document the built-in functions. You have to find out the hard way what > they disrupt -- for example, the delay_ms() function is nice to have, but > don't try to use TMR0-driven interrupts! Documenting this (and a few > other gotchas) would have saved me time spent figuring out why things > didn't work. > > All in all, though, I'd have to say it sucks less than the other > alternatives. That has got to be *my* greatest complaint; The lack of prudent documentation for the natively supported functions. Many times, there is behavior that I didn't expect, was contraintuitive or just plain wrong. Documentation for each function is scarce. I find myself constantly adding notes to my PCM manual to augment the descriptions there. If this were a largish system compiler, one might not be so concerned about what was happening behind the scenes. But, this is not the case with embedded development systems, and particularily not prudent with the PIC. On the other hand, "it doesn't suck", and even if it isn't the greatest development system, one would be hardpressed to beat the cost/performance ratio. A lot can be said for lower upfront costs. I really *don't* know how I would approach my boss for an outlay of $800 or so of capital. $99 a year is quite a bit easier to justify. -d -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.