Isaac Marino Bavaresco wrote:
> By my experience, most projects end with a good deal of unused program
> memory space, so I don=B4t worry much about final code size. These days,
> it is even less important as the program memory of the new devices is
> getting larger at the same time their price is dropping.

This is nonsense of course.  There will always be high volume cost sensitive
projects pushing the limits.  If the parts get more capable and cheaper,
more things will be crammed in or cheaper parts used.  The majority of
projects aren't cram jobs, but a significant fraction do bump into limits.
Since those are generally high volume projects, they account for a much
larger fraction of microcontrollers sold.  In fact, I'd say such projects
dominate in terms of units produced.

> And it really is easier to debug C code than assembly

I have found completely the opposite.  At least with C18, I can rarely get
MPLAB to show me local variables, step cleanly from one source line to the
next, etc.  Debugging the C18 parts of a mixed C18/MPASM project is *much*
harder than the MPASM parts.

> and to change
> something  in it after some months or years after it is finished.

Then you need to learn to document your code better.  This is not a language
issue, but a code discipline and documentation issue, and applies to all
languages.  I've seen some horribly obtuse C code.  You can make a mess in
any language, and you can also write clear code.  Don't blame the language.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.
-- =

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