My question is  concerning C how many people out there use Mikro C and the
EASYPIC 7 system for the midrange parts? I had the EASYPIC6 and it was
great but I tried to learn mikro c but  I didn't get anywhere so I wrote
simple programs in MPASM under MPLA8x and compiledit and then loaded my hex
file to the Easypic 6 board and it worked great!  I have download MPLABX
but I haven't really played with it that much as its really different than
the MPLAB 8. ide. I dont see that  C is really useful  for Fxxxx parts
except the newer ones that are optimized for C like the 16F1847 part which
is an awesome part!
Thanks Michael Johnston

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Byron Jeff <byronjeff@clayton.edu> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 11:23:55AM -0700, Bob LeDoux wrote:
>
> > Back in days of yore there were people with names like Nixon, Datallo,
> > Myke creating elegant routines to perform difficult tasks with 8-bit
> > PIC's in assembler.
>
> I remember those days.
>
> >
> > I don't depend on system development for my income.  So I still enjoy
> > projects for the challenge.  For example, I developed a version of
> > Conway's Game of Life using a 64 x 128 graphic LCD powered by a
> > 16F88--programmed in assembler.
>
> Cool beans.
>
> >
> > I wonder, am I the only person left using a PicKit2, with MPLAB IDE 8.x=
x,
> > assembler programming 12F and 16F chips?   My chips only have 2 or 3
> > numbers following the "F"?
>
> I upgraded to the midrange PICs a long time ago, then upgraded to the
> PIC24FV series. Still programming in assembler though.
>
> >
> > Am I the only person who sometimes uses absolute code and prefers to
> > Quickbuild my programs rather than build a project?
>
> I'm a Linux guy. So it's all Makefiles and command line for my developmen=
t.
> Just the raw assembler and linker with no IDE in sight. I use pk2cmd to
> program to a PicKit 2.
>
> >
> > Those were the characteristics that encouraged beginners to move to PIC=
's
> > after playing with the Parallax Basic Stamp. With linked files and
> > projects, those days are gone. Systems like the Arduino mean programmer=
s
> > are slow to grasp processors at the machine level.
>
> Microchip has made it difficult also by moving everything to C and forcin=
g
> a dependency on libraries to get things done. I really don't mind C. But
> the force feeding of their libraries to do everything is a bit annoying.
>
> My solution over the last few years has been developing FORTH interpreter=
s
> for development. It completely decouples the development from the PC,
> functions at a low enough level to still see what's going on, and has
> enough high level tools to get useful stuff done. And like the Basic Stam=
p
> of old it's possible to have code in onboard or offboard flash or run
> directly from RAM.
>
> >
> > By the way, I used this question as an excuse to post with a topic
> > identifier [PIC].  I haven't seen many of those lately on the [PIC] lis=
t.
>
> Excellent.
>
> BAJ
>
> --
> Byron A. Jeff
> Associate Professor: Department of Computer Science and Information
> Technology
> College of Information and Mathematical Sciences
> Clayton State University
> http://faculty.clayton.edu/bjeff
> --
> http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>
--=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
.