I am using the PICC18 from Hi-tech for the 18F series. They did a good job, and really is the #1 choice for commercial choice. But for hobbies, I really want to see a free available GCC based PICC18 platform C and C++ compilor comes out in next 2 years.
Nice Dragon

David P Harris <dpharris@TELUS.NET> wrote:
Hi Scott-
Well, I thought that I would probably concentrate on the 18F series from
now on, and therefore, maybe a C compiler would be a good thing.

So, do you think it is worth the effort for us to persue an 18F port (it
should be more straight forward than the 14 and 16 series port)?

And, if so, would it be better to concentrate on GCC or SDCC?
David


Scott Dattalo wrote:

>On Sat, 20 Mar 2004, xavier.montagne wrote:
>
>
>
>>For technical reason GCC cannot be ported to a PIC18 target....
>>
>>
>
>The only technical reason I know is the skill of the programmer performing
>the port. Instead, you could say that for 'practical' reasons it's
>difficult to port GCC to the PIC architecture and that SDCC is more
>suitable. When I first started the SDCC PIC port a few years ago, one of
>the reasons I chose it is because the GNUPIC tools already had support for
>an assembler, linker, and debugger. Targetting GCC would mean that a good
>portion of those would have to be recreated. (I know, technically you
>don't have to port gas and ld too, but to be consistant with the tool
>chain it's a good idea).
>
>I haven't performed any serious work with on SDCC in the last year and a
>half. I had taken to what I say would be 'alpha' level. Most of the basic
>stuff worked just fine. Since then, Vangelis Rokas has started a pic16
>port ( a sort of fork from the pic14 port). A few people have patched the
>pic14 port to work better with gplink. The last timed I tried the SDCC pic
>port, I was disappointed to see that the regression tests no longer pass.
>In fact, the compiler generates garbage. So now I'd say it sits in
>pre-alpha (operand types are no longer processed correctly for some
>reason). I don't know about the state of the pic16 port.
>
>I don't have any major near term plans to fix SDCC.
>
>If I did, this is what I'd do:
>
> 1) fix the current regression tests
> 2) move the pcode optimizer to the linker
> 3) move the call tree analyzer to the linker
> 4) move the register allocation to the linker
>
>
>Scott
>
>--
>http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
>mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu
>
>
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu