While I prefer to understand the chip to a depth that
only asm allows, it is completely valid that some one
whould prefer to code in C.  The benefits of C are
very real.

As part of evaluating cc5x, I rewrote my driveway
sensor logger code in C (ds1302-SPI, relay, serial
I/O).  It took all of about 3 hours vs the 2 days to
do the asm version (and I borrowed a lot of asm code
from previous projects).  Granted, some time was saved
because I was writing the program the second time but
not having to worry about details like the screwy
conditional instructions of the PIC is a big benefit.

Phil

--- Jan-Erik Soderholm <jan-erik.soderholm@telia.com>
wrote:
> Hasan A. Khan wrote :
> 
> > Executing: "C:\Program Files\bknd\CC5X\CC5X.EXE"
> > SAMPLE1.C -CC -fINHX8M -p16F628 -I"C:\Program
> > Files\bknd\CC5X" -a -L -Q -V -FM +reloc.inc
> > Error : Unable to open file 'reloc.inc'
> > 
> > why can't the compiler find it?
> 
> Does it exist at all ?
> 
> Jan-Erik.
> 
> PS:
> You also wrote :
> " One thing I learned was that I didn't have to use
> assembler..."
> 
> No, but why not ?
> You are using a 16F628. Not that much memory. And
> you'll
> probaby learn the chip faster with assembler then
> with C.
> Have you written anything in (PIC) assembler ?
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
> 


		
Discover Yahoo! 
Use Yahoo! to plan a weekend, have fun online and more. Check it out! 
http://discover.yahoo.com/
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist