William Couture wrote:
> It would not surprise me if this was deliberate.
> =

> They are now advertising that they have a free version of their compiler =
that
> works with all PICs and no limitations.
> =

> However, the registered version is supposed to produce code that is
> half the size of that produced by the free version.

The compiler actually prints a massive "this is how big your code is /now/, =

but this is how much smaller it would be with OCG..." advert in the linker =

output... It claims 57%.

> If they did not produce horrible code for the free version, would people
> really pay $$$$ for a 10% to 20% improvement in the paid version?

I wouldn't pay =A31-2k for a HT-PICC licence, period. If there was a "non =

profit" version that cost less (a la the EAGLE licence), maybe didn't come =

with OCG but at least had basic optimisations I'd consider it.

CCS PCM doesn't look too bad for the cost. I really need to install it in a =

virtual machine and have a play with it at some point...

> And I really should compare the results of the previous, "limited" free
> version against the new free version.  I'll bet that the "limited" free
> version is much better than the "improved" version.

No doubt... but the free version doesn't support the 16F616 (or the 12F615) =

which makes it basically useless for what I'm doing.

Thanks,
-- =

Phil.
piclist@philpem.me.uk
http://www.philpem.me.uk/

-- =

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