On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 7:21 AM, Matt Bennett wrot= e: > Both C30 and C32 are GCC based, though I don't know if they keep to the > same revision (of GCC). The changes are pretty incremental in the step to > the XC compilers, at least initially. They're not a whole new set of > compilers. The first step is branding and trying to remove the existing > confusion with the compilers and naming conventions. What's there will > remain there, and initially, I think the convention is just a naming > convention (Hitech PICC and PICC18 become XC8, though I believe with a > flag to compile C18 syntax), all the different flavors of C30 become XC16= , > C32 becomes XC32. I think this is a sensible approach. The interesting thing will be the efficiency when using XC8 to compile exis= ting C18 codes. We know that PICC18 is more efficient than MPLAB C18. But in this case, not so sure about the efficiency in the end since some type of translation may be involved (convert C18 syntax to PICC/PICC18 based XC8 syntax). > In the long term, I believe it is to go with the general philosophy of > MPLAB- one IDE across all the architectures, similar register naming > conventions- in that spirit, trying to make the syntax of the compilers a= s > similar as possible. =A0A welcome change, as I think anyone who works acr= oss > Microchip architectures and compilers will agree. Yes I think this is a good idea. With similar peripheral and now similar C compiler syntax and similar library functions, it is easier to switch from one PIC family to another one. --=20 Xiaofan --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .