Hi James, Just get a Nucleo or Discovery board, there's a bunch of them. Program/debu= g hardware is onboard so you don't need any other hardware. I'd suggest one= of the cheap ones with a 100 or 400 series STM32 on it. They start about $= 8. The Discovery boards always have some extra goodies on board, like senso= rs, displays etc. The Nucleo boards just have a button and LED, but they do= have lots of connectors, including ones that let you plug Arduino shields = onto. I just used a Nucleo F401RE to help me figure out pin assignments for= a device I'm designing, it was $13.80. For dev tools, STM32 Cube IDE is the official one, it's free and install is= straightforward, mostly a lot of clicking OK. When you start a new project= you will need to have an internet connection to get device family files, b= ut other than that initial part it's a complete and standalone dev environm= ent. There's also Mbed, which is an online dev environment but I have not used i= t. And there is also stm32duino which lets you use certain STM32's like an Ard= uino and use the Arduino dev environment. Have not used that either. Anyway, thumbs up from me on STM32. Best regards, Bob ________________________________________ From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu on behalf of James = Burkart=20 Sent: Monday, November 11, 2019 10:00 AM To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Subject: Re: [PIC] PIC32 Development Hey Bob, I'd like to expand my horizons and learn something more than 8bit PICs. If I wanted to venture into the realm of STM32 how would you recommend I start? I have virtually no experience with Harmony or any of the PIC32 stuff if that matters. On Mon, Nov 11, 2019, 10:43 AM Bob Blick wrote: > +1 for STM32 both dev and debug tools. > > Bob > > ________________________________________ > From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu on behalf of Neil > Sent: Monday, November 11, 2019 3:03 AM > To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. > Subject: Re: [PIC] PIC32 Development > > My answer is from my experiences a couple/few years ago... > > When I decided to use PIC32's, I decided to stop being so hung up on > extracting every last ounce of performance from the chips (as I did with > PIC16's and PIC18's) and use the tools (Harmony) and libraries available > to make things easier on myself. It was a frustrating process because > documentation was scattered and lots of the software was in limbo. The > help within the tool was telling me to use one of the libraries (PLIB or > HAL), while the pdf help doc within the folder of the same installation > was telling me to use the other. Lots of code just didn't work as > expected and I sat down for coffee with my local FAE and proved it to > him. I had also just started using MPLAB X and that added to the pain, > as I was on a 1440-line resolution laptop and the fonts did not scale > properly. Apparently they were hardcoded in some parts of the IDE and > scalable in other parts. Some tools (such as the graphics generator) > just flat out did not work. Also verified by my FAE. Updates were > happening rapidly and the changes were significant. Around this time, > there was a chip family called the PIC32MZ..EC, which was apparently > VERY buggy. Even my FAE told me to avoid it. > > My impression was Microchip was scrambling to get a product (Harmony) > out there to compete with others and was throwing out very unfinished > code, while also changing directions during that time, so I was playing > alpha-tester. And it made no sense to start learning an older > code/library system (PLIB) as it would not be supported anymore. > > Now prior to this, I used the Chipkit boards for PIC32 code, and things > were simpler and worked well, though a bit limiting, So I continued to > used the PIC32 in that platform for other things. > > Around that time I got a customer gig to develop a product using an ARM > processor (they wanted ARM because of the buzzword) and also started > playing with STM32's, which was a much better experience. It was so much > more mature. Since then I've stuck with STM32 processors. > > I haven't touched PIC32's for over a year or two now so can't provide a > recent experience, but I would expect/hope they have their act together > a bit more by now. Isaac (on here) is a big PIC32 fan so check with him > for a different perspective. > > Cheers, > -Neil. > > > > > On 11/10/2019 9:25 PM, Josh Koffman wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I=92m considering starting my first project targeting the PIC32 series. > I=92ve > > long been using the 8 bit chips, and I=92d like to try the 32 bit ones.= The > > main reason is that I=92m connecting to a module that the manufacturer > > provides example PIC32 code for. Plus I=92m hoping I can get some faste= r > PWM > > peripheral speeds due to faster clock (have to check this though). Also > > feels like it might not be a bad idea to move to a processor a bit more > > optimized for C programming. > > > > My current plan is to program in XC32. I=92m looking at the PIC32MX270 > > family, but I am open to suggestions if there are newer/better choices > > (particularly if they have newer PWM peripherals). > > > > My requirements on this first project are fairly simple - handle some > setup > > of the module, pull data via I2C, and do some PWM. Future projects will > get > > more complex. > > > > So on to the questions: > > > > What dev tools are people currently using? I=92ve been looking at the > Segger > > J-Link devices. I believe they integrate into MPLAB, though I need to > > verify that. I have never used JTAG before, but from the brief bits I= =92ve > > read I believe it would be faster than ICSP on these chips. Would I als= o > > need something like a PICkit or ICD to program for standalone running? > > > > Any general advice on XC32 or the chips in general? I know I need to > check > > errata carefully. Anything else? What toolchains are other people using= ? > > > > Thank you! > > > > Josh > > --=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 .