2006/8/28, Scott Dattalo <scott@dattalo.com>:
>
> On Mon, 2006-08-28 at 21:00 +1200, Brent Brown wrote:
>
> >> You COULD switch to assembler, of course...
> >
> > COULD but WONT!   :-)
>
> Hmm?


Basically I have the feeling the design stage for this project was cut
short. I enjoy making a design before I code anything, even if it is on
pieces of scrap paper. From this design I can then tell what kind of
PICmicro I will need, and what the approximate code sizes are for the
various features. I would not get a 16F88 if I didn't have I2C or SPI, and
if my design indicated it would benefit from coding in C, I would probably
look towards the 18F family immediately. This is how I ended up with the
16F628A for my NTSC system, which worked very well (better than any other
16F series would have worked, although the bug in the EEPROM write routines
was a bit unfortunate).

Generally, when I have a good design, I don't really care about coding the
entire project again. The coding phase for an 4-8 Kword PICmicro should be
very short (2-4 days), especially if the design covers what needs to be done
where, and how it can be tested quickly. Also, rewriting everything tends to
improve the quality of my code.

I would be worried about redesigning the PCB though, and I can see why this
would be a major concern of Brent. I was happy that he told us the
difference in code efficiency between the 16F and 18F series, I thought it
would've been better, but at least we now have one sample.

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