how large and complex firmware you design using pbp?

[chrdcv]

I am actually involving in re-wrote some pieces of code for one AVL vehicle tracker developed with microchip pic18f6627 uC. In this design, Melabs PIC BASIC PRO was used for develop the entire source code (in BASIC dialect).

The project initiate in 2005 and now, need some modifications (because of use another GPS module, GSM modem, and others fews hardware modifications). The main problem now concern about the methodologies adopted for another two programmers that begin the design:
1. They don´t use interrupts in serial tx and rx, the data comming from modules (GPS and GSM) are treated by polling using serin/serout subrotines

2. Not develop a good programming practice, the unstructural aproach result in poor code design, large utilization of goto´s statements instead of gosub´s.

3. Usage some peaces of assembly code for build data arrays instead of use arrays in BASIC language.

Well, thats is all. Then I would like hear if someone develop huge firmware using PIC BASIC PRO, the dificulties founded and the programmings abstractions utilized for contourn then.

Thanks in advance, chrdcv.

[mackrackit]

I have heard some say that PBP has a lot of blote, I do not know. I think is comes down to the one at the keyboard.

I have never had any troubles from using PBP no matter how big the program, so I can not speak of any difficulties.

BTW... No need to double post. That just uses up code space

[chrdcv]

Thanks mackrackit!

I would like hear some commentaries about vast usage of BASIC programming dialect in embedded world! Personally, I am re-writting all code in C or forth (programming languages that I dominate), but my boss insistis finishes it with BASIC.

About replicate topic, sorry I put firs message in wrong section then I put again in correct area! I would advice that the same error not will occur again!

Thanks again and have a nice weakend!
christian

[Charles Linquis]

I have a program that completely fills a 128K part (18F8723). It has about 8000 lines of source, and the .HEX file that I use to program the part is 342K bytes.

[Bruce]

I've been designing embedded products for over 15 years now. Started on the 8051, and
migrated to the PIC when a friend of mine introduced me to PBP.

I have never looked back to the 8051 series, and have never had a single problem with any
code that wasn't something "I" caused. PBP is hands-down the best BASIC compiler for the
PIC - period.

Write a tiny program - or one that completely fills the chip, and it's still rock soild.

I know it sucks to take over a project done by someone that may/may not have had a clue,
but if you're using PBP, then you have one of the best PIC compilers on the planet, and you
should have no problems cleaning up the mess you've been handed...;o}

I also do a lot of work in C, and assembler, but nothing beats PBP for quick & reliable results.

[Acetronics2]

Hi, CHRDCV

Reading your post Twice ...

I do not think you are facing a "tool" problem ... but "Method" problem ...

as Bruce says ... " nothing beats PBP for quick & reliable results " and I really do agree !!! On my amateur side, I build lots of programs ... but each program for few chips !!!

You won't find a better tool for developing applications quickly ...

IF you look for Bytes saving ... do not say PBP need Huge memory room nor ( cf your point 3 ) : PBP produced code for tables is very close to assembler !!! ... and the "structure" is very similar !!!

Most of time it is a "programming style" issue, as Basic permits dozens of ways to solve one "operation"
Some funny contests on this forum have shown code size factor could vary from 1 to .... 10 and even more !!!


Now ... the ONLY Basic language ( straight following the manual ... ) "weakness" i've found is for interrupts ... that often leads to carefully design the flow of the program.
But with some "unregistered" tricks ... It can be as quick as Assembler !!!

And remember "structuring" a program is not a must with Basic ... but it greatly helps to get a readable listing ... once more, it's not a Language but writer question.


In the End ...

What elders did is not always stupid ... they just thought another way of us ...

What about trying to understand their work a bit ???

Alain

[rmteo]

I have a program that completely fills a 128K part (18F8723). It has about 8000 lines of source, and the .HEX file that I use to program the part is 342K bytes.

Just out of curiosity, what does your application do that takes up 128K?

[Charles Linquis]

Monitors 9 fan tachometers, 5 analog voltages, 4 temperatures, 4 currents and up to 32 humidity sensors, displays all data on LCD and LEDs, drives about 10 parallel I/O and runs relays and controls fan speeds on the basis of temperature using the PWM controller, talks over RS-232 and Ethernet using UDP, tcp, SNMP and SSH protocols. The heavy network stuff is handled by a Lantronix XPORT or MatchPortAR, although all the SNMP and trap handling is done by the PIC.

Virtually everything is programmable through menus. All the display, entry and bounds checking routines take up quite a bit of codespace.