James,

 I would tend to agree with Olin here in this case.  I too have used the
simulator to debug and develop code=20
 for various projects.  I have a PICKIT 2 as well as an ICD2, but I use
the simulator most of the time. =20
 I seldom use the hardware mentioned above.  When I simulate the code I
have written, I usually use the
 manual pin stimulation mode and select the toggle function for inputs.=20
YMMV.  It depends on what you want
 to test and how closely you can match the simulator inputs with actual
inputs that will ultimately be=20
 used in the actual product.  But for simplicity and expediency, in my
book, the simulator can't be beat.

 Regards,

 Jim

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [PIC] pickit2 unreliable debug 12F675
> From: "Olin Lathrop" <olin_piclist@embedinc.com>
> Date: Tue, November 16, 2010 8:16 am
> To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <piclist@MIT.EDU>
>=20
>=20
> James Newton wrote:
> > Anyone used a PICKit2 to debug a 12F675?
>=20
> As I said before, ask yourself whether you really need this.  The simulat=
or
> is a much nicer debugger than the PICKit2 as long as you can simulate the
> inputs well enough.  What inputs does this chip receive?
>=20
> Seriously, you might get your project running quicker if you ditched the
> PICKit2 and spent the time instead setting up simulation of whatever inpu=
ts
> you need.  On such a simple chip, manually changing a input pin or feedin=
g a
> value into the A/D might be good enough.  I've done this a bunch of times=
..
>=20
>=20
> ********************************************************************
> Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
> (978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.
> --=20
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist


--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.