I'm looking at this for 18F's, but may use it for PIC32's later. At =20 that point I'd have to buy yet another version if I were using C18. I say one of your older posts (few years) where you also said you =20 would not use it for anything production. Is this opinion below new =20 and revised, or based on that past experience? Cheers, -Neil. Quoting Forrest Christian : > I own a licensed copy of MikroC, but it isn't currently installed on any > machine... > > I really liked the libraries - if I was doing hobby stuff with PIC's I > think it would be my choice, along with an EasyPIC development board for > prototyping work. It didn't feel 'production stable' though... > > But it definitely didn't seem any better than CCS or the Microchip > compiler. I like the CCS IDE although the C compiler pissed me off > earlier this weekend due to an apparent bug in the #inline pragma... or > more specifically, I had a function which decided it wouldn't work if it > was forced inline.... > > Like others, the Microchip compilers seem rock solid. If I didn't like > the CCS IDE and didn't have a big chunk of code in CCS that I don't feel > like porting this week, I'd definitely switch to C18 for everything. > Espeically since I don't use PIC16's in any 'new' projects anymore. > > -forrest > > On 9/6/2011 1:05 AM, V G wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 6:32 PM, PICdude wrote: >> >>> Would you care to comment on it's stability& "bug-free-ness"? And if >>> you have any size comparisons between this and any other compiler (or >>> even MPASM), that would be nice. >>> >> My comment here probably has of little value, but: >> >> I don't like it. I tried it many months ago and I just don't like it. >> Doesn't feel right, ya know? >> >> >> Update: just checked the website. The IDE seems to have vastly improved. >> Maybe the compiler and libraries have as well. I will try it again. >> >> For C, my preference of compilers is as follows (for various reasons): >> >> 1. Microchip - Good support, solid compilers, very good code output, I n= ever >> found any bugs, works exactly the way I expect it to. Netbeans is a good >> choice for MPLAB X. Never failed me. >> 2. HI-TECH - /Amazing/ machine code quality, based on the optimization >> settings you pick for it (code size/speed). >> 3. CCS - Pretty good machine code quality, but the real strengths are in= the >> libraries and ease of use. IDE is kinda fun. Very easy to get started. >> >> I may insert Mikro between #2 and #3 after I try it out. > > -- > 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 .