> The problem comes from an inexperienced user writing code 
> that might make 
> perfect sense on some other processor, but that is difficult 
> to implement on 
> a PIC.  In these cases, some of these compilers will silently 
> generate truly 
> horrid code.  Not inefficient, amazingly awful.

If so, who cares? If the generated code is correct, and its size and
execution time are not off (with respect to what?) by a factor of more
than let's say 100, what's the problem?

> I write for and mostly talk to PIC hobbyists.  Many, many of 
> these folks 
> (and way back at the beginning of this thread the OP sounded 
> like a hobbyist 
> new to the PIC) have a very limited understanding of 
> microcontrollers in 
> general, let alone the PIC.  For them, the PIC is very alien 
> territory, and 
> very hard to grasp.  Putting a layer of abstraction in there 
> (the compiler) 
> BEFORE they understand the architecture make it a LOT harder. 

I disagree. I have seen kids who don't even understand binary numbers
sucesfully write small Jal programs. For many people a HLL is the *only*
way to do something on a PIC. They might be doing things in a terrible
way, but they get something done.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: www.voti.nl/hvu
 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist