On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 23:24:45 -0700, Vitaliy wrote:
> Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> I pointed out this in my first reply to your post. C18 has a peripheral
>> library and Microchip does not want to support it any more at some
>> point. However it seems to me they may want to change. The problem is
>> that they forget to put a disclaim that the library needs some fine
>> tuning and may have bugs.
>>
>> A relevant discusion:
>> http://forum.microchip.com/tm.aspx?m=282340
>>
> Yes, I've run into this issue while writing code for a newer 18F. I
> ported the libraries I wanted to use, then scrapped them and wrote my own
> functions.
>
>> Notice some C18 and HiTech PICC18 power users refer
>> CCS/mikroC as toy compiler...
>>
> I couldn't find any such references by following the link above, except
> your own:
>
> "CCS is shipping some libraries but it is said to be very buggy."
>
> Matt doesn't seem to think CCS is a toy.

No, I don't. We don't use the CCS supplied libraries all that much except
for "quick and dirty" projects -- test code, test sets, things like that.
For production code we have a standard framework template and a lot of
libraries we've developed that port easily from one microcontroller family
to another.

CCS is always a "work in progress". As long as you remember this and stick
with a version you find stable then you will be OK. I just recently
upgraded to their 4.x version because I needed support for some newer PICs.
The 4.x version of the compiler was a major overhaul and the early versions
were quite buggy (sounds like Windows, huh?). I let the dust settle over
the past six months and the version I'm running now seems very stable and
I've had no problems with it. I had been using the same previous 3.x
version for well over a year before that and still have it installed.

Matt Pobursky
Maximum Performance Systems

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