At 22:57 12/29/2001 -0800, Mark Newland wrote:
>The last thing I want to do is create yet another holy war on the great
>aspects of one C compiler over another.  What I would like to ask is the
>complexity involved with re-writing my old CCS code to someother
>compiler such as Hi-Tech.  I know that there is some work involved when
>going to/from Microchips native assembly language (*.asm) and Techtools
>CVASM (*.src) for instance.  However, it is not beyond a little time to
>do so.  Would converting from my old CCS code to Hi-Tech be better,
>worse, or about the same as going from a *.asm file to a *.src file?

I guess it depends a lot on how you wrote your code. I'm not intimately
familiar with the CCS compiler (test-drove it a few years back and then
used HiTech), but in any case you'd have to provide routines for all of the
special commands. Many declarations are different, too, especially the bit
types.

Much of it can probably be addressed by providing library routines with a
functionality simulating the CCS special commands and some smart use of the
C preprocessor to translate the most common constructes form one to the
other. But I'd expect to have to inspect each line of code. This is the
price for the very high non-compliance of the CCS compiler.

ge

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.