Sergio Masci wrote: > Dave Tweed wrote: > > I can't tell what the output format of your assembler is. Is it > > compatible with the MPLAB linker? > > No. XCASM produces far more information about an executable than the > MPLAB linker can deal with e.g. XCASM handles floating point directly, > produces RAM bank and code page diagnostic information which the XCSIM > simiulator can use to track incorrect bank and page setting during > program simulation. So, how do I link my modules together and get my code into the PIC? That's never addressed in the online documentation. > > Can it accept MPASM/gpasm source code? > > assembler source yes, assembler directives no. In which case, I don't get to take advantage of existing libraries of macros and/or executable code. > > Why would I spend GBP100 or GBP1250 to switch to a tool I have no > > control over? > > GPB 100 does not buy you a MPASM clone. It buys you a sophisticated > professional assembler. If you can get by with MPASM or gpasm then you > can use these free of charge. If you need something that improves your > productivity (amongst other things greatly helps eliminate bank and page > issuses which so many people find anonying) then XCASM is available. > Regardless which route you take you are still paying unless your time is > worth nothing that is. Except that MPASM supports *all* of the PICs, not just a selected set. >From what you say below, I infer that although the Enterprise Edition of XCASM gives me access to the meta tools, it doesn't come with support for any additional Microchip processors over the "PIC locked" version. My Perl scripts are not processor specific, so they do not limit me in any way. They merely extend the syntax of the underlying assembler in carefully controlled ways. Unaugmented source code will pass through them unmodified. > I assume that by "control over" you mean "one that you have the source > code for and can fix yourself". Yes I know that many people think like > this but even so these people are in the minority. Most people do not > want to fix a program they find bugs in, they either want it fixed for > them or they look for a workaround. But your website never makes it clear how much support I can expect. In many ways, it gives the appearance of a one-man shop that may not be any more responsive to issues than I am when maintaining my own code. > > I'm not even sure that the "Enterprise Edition" supports the processors > > I'm interested in. > > XCASM is a mata assembler, the enterprise edition gives full access to > the configuration components. In other words you can define your own > opcode syntax and the way it generates machine code. It comes with > several processor definitions (e.g. Z80, 6502, 68HC11, PIC16 etc) which > you can easily extend or change to suit your own requirements. You also > get access to the intermediate high level opcodes of the "expression > compiler" which you refer to above. This allows you to hack the > expression compiler for other processors. XCASM enterprise edition is > intended for people / companies who wish to develope their own CPU cores > using FPGAs. I'm not interested in a tool that I have to "hack" (your term) to support standard products. I'd rather invest that time in my own code base. Furthermore, there's zero documentation on your website about the metalanguage used in the Enterprise Edition. It must be quite expressive if you can use it to describe the banking and paging requirements of a PIC and then do the global flow analysis and optimization of the inserted instructions. I would think this would be a major selling point. I'm trying to help you out here. In your last several messages, you've revealed quite a bit of interesting information about your products that isn't readily available (if at all) on your website. I'm just trying to point out that you would capture a lot more interest in your products if you'd place this kind of information on your website in a well-organized manner. While you're at it, fix all of the spelling and grammatical errors as well. People will be a lot less hesitant about spending professional-level prices for tools if they look like they come from a professional-level outfit. -- Dave Tweed -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist