Well said Dwayne. At my company we develop with about 10 different CPU families, depending which best fits the application. We also do a lot of small and medium volume projects where the software development and debug time are the major cost drivers. We develop almost 100% in C. About 10-15 years ago we standardized on a software template that maximizes code reusability. The result is we now have well over 100 library modules that can (and are) freely ported between PIC, AVR, MSP430, ARM and a few other architectures. When we start a new application now we can generally have all of the prototype hardware devices and application shell up and running in a day or two. Then the bulk of the work is the project specific application. Writing new hardware device drivers are the exception rather than the rule. It's cut down dramatically on the time it takes from start to finish for a new project. It also allows us to be fairly hardware agnostic with regards to the CPU in our designs. Matt Pobursky Maximum Performance Systems=20 On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:25:22 -0600, Dwayne Reid wrote: > I've seen a lot of people lambasting Basic and I don't really understand > why. > > First, let me preface this by saying that I do NOT want to start a war > here. Instead, let me mention what I see. > > I have a buddy (former co-worker) who can program circles around me in > everything except assembler. He writes in C or C++ for stuff that runs > on a PC and he uses PIC Basic Pro for anything that he writes that runs > on a PIC. He can understand something that I write in assembler but he > has a hard time writing it himself. > > Just like me - I can understand what he writes in PIC Basic Pro but I > have a hard time writing it myself. > > He can bang a PIC project out at least two or three times faster than I > can - he writes in Basic while I write in assembler. > > I use him to write code for low-volume projects where time really is > money. I tend to write most of the code for our high-volume projects (in > assembler) where saving a buck per PIC really adds up over the years > (tens of thousands of dollars). > > I guess that what I am saying is this: there really is room for easy-to- > use languages like JAL and BASIC as well as the higher-end languages like > C. > > dwayne > > -- > Dwayne Reid > Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd Edmonton, AB, CANADA > (780) 489-3199 voice (780) 487-6397 fax > www.trinity-electronics.com > Custom Electronics Design and Manufacturing --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .