John,
     I'm doing hobby work and work for our model railroad club. I'm not=20
doing any production work per se. The model railroad stuff does need to=20
last and work correctly but I think that what I'm doing will be fine for=20
them. I have a lot of the 8 bit micros in stock so I use them. But I=20
will keep in mind what you have told me about the 16 bit parts. I'm=20
installing SDCC as I write this.
Thanks,
rich!

On 7/2/2014 8:21 PM, John J. McDonough wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-07-02 at 19:26 -0500, Richard R. Pope wrote:
>> Bob,
>>       I couldn't afford Hi-tech's products and I really like Microchip's
>> IDE. What puzzles me is that X worked fine six months ago. I did a clean
>> install of XP and it still won't work. It locks up the whole computer.
>> MPLAB 8.x works but it is crude compared to X.
>>       I'll have to look at UltraEdit. I wonder what I could use to do th=
e
>> compiling that is free. I like C much better than Assembly.
> Take a look at SDCC.  It is way better than it used to be.  The PIC code
> it produces tends to be kind of crappy, but I couldn't find a measurable
> way to show it is more crappy than HiTech, and it uses standard file
> formats.  And it has multiple targets, so if you are also playing with
> other architectures, it supports many, although generally not targets
> that are already supported by gcc.
>
> BTW, if you are not making stuff for production, look at the 16 bit
> parts.  In small quantities the price is almost identical, even the
> dsPICs, they are far more C friendly, and they are supported by gcc
> which has become pretty much the gold standard of compilers.  The one
> down side is that they tend to be a little more power hungry.  Pretty
> much the only time I use the 8 bit parts anymore is for power sensitive
> applications, which is a tiny part of what I do.
>
> --McD
>
>

--=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
.