Peter Johansson wrote:
>=20
> The argument is also somewhat irrelevant, because any hobbyist who
> wants to use C to target a small cheap processor should really just
> pick an ARM, or even a 16 or 32 bit PIC.

That's a pretty strong statement - and one I definitely don't agree with.

Take a look for example at my minute timer project:
http://www.gooligum.com.au/kits/timer1/timer1.html
It's very much "hobbyist" - a small project done just for fun.
Firmware was written in C - see
http://www.gooligum.com.au/kits/timer1/Timer1.c
That's written for HI-TECH C v9.83, and worked fine in "Lite mode".  This
compiler became XC8, and "lite mode" became "free mode" - with optimisation
disabled (not to be confused with the earlier HI-TECH PICC-lite).
Target processor is a 16F690 - a 20-pin mid-range 8-bit PIC.  Yes, 16-bit
PICs are now available in 20-pin (and even 14-pin) hobbyist-friendly DIP
packages.  I'm not aware of any ARMs with such a low pin count in a DIP.
But the point is that this works fine, and although the program code is
hardly complex, it's non-trivial enough that it was much easier to write in
C than assembler.

C for small PICs is very much accessible to hobbyists, and can get great
results for small projects without having to buy a compiler - even on small
PICs, which are often more suitable than an often physically larger 32-bit
MCU, especially when avoiding SMD, as many hobbyists like to do.


Regards,
David Meiklejohn
www.gooligum.com.au



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