Herbert Graf wrote:

> On Sun, 2006-10-22 at 17:04 -0400, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> ICD2 is relatively cheap as well but it is really painful to use for
>> bigger Microchip MCUs like dsPIC33F/PIC24.
> 
> Define "painful"? 

Depends on your frame of reference. Up until several years ago, I used to
use ICEs quite frequently. When comparing something like the ICD2 with a
typical ICE, it is an adaptation that can be "painful" :)

Of course you can work around some of the limits (don't single step, don't
look at too many things at the same time), but this may be perceived as
"painful" -- especially considering that some of the features simply are
not available (execution history at every break, unlimited breakpoints
etc). And that's not even talking about the features good ICEs have...
http://www.lauterbach.com/

FWIW, I'm not using ICEs anymore, but I rarely if ever use the ICD2 as a
debugger -- simply because IMO it's too "painful" to be used that way. I
just use other methods like serial debug output. Adding required
statements, recompiling, reprogramming and finding the bug this way is
usually quicker than it would have been trying to stop the ICD2 at several
places and use it to look at stuff.

Gerhard

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