Microcode Plus vs Proton Suite

[rdxbam]

i make use of the melabs PBP compiler and have used the Microcode Plus IDE.

i was thinking of getting the Proton Suite. when i dl'd their demo version the IDE looked almost identical to the Microcode Plus IDE. i see they are both by mecanique.

What is the diff in the Proton Suite versus the PBP/Microcode IDE combo? any worth considering?

[ShortBus]

Proton requires a USB dongle (hardware key). PBP doesn't even have a serial number. For that reason alone I didn't even bother downloading the eval copy of Proton before deciding to purchase PBP.

[Archangel]

i make use of the melabs PBP compiler and have used the Microcode Plus IDE.

i was thinking of getting the Proton Suite. when i dl'd their demo version the IDE looked almost identical to the Microcode Plus IDE. i see they are both by mecanique.

What is the diff in the Proton Suite versus the PBP/Microcode IDE combo? any worth considering?

The IDE is likely the same, the "meat and potatoes" is in the compiler, you can write everything in notepad if you choose, the compiler's do not care. PBP is in My opinion the easiest full functioning compiler to use and very nearly as efficient as C without the brain damage and excessive formatting C requires. You will get your programs up and running faster using PBP and there is excellent support (here on this forum especially). PBP is fully compatible with assembly code and in fact generates an assembly code file which is then assembled into the machine instructions in the form of an Intel hex file. PBP is not an interpreted basic!, it is a real high level programming language.

[rdxbam]

well Shortbus, i agree with ya.

for some reason, i had thought the Proton Dev suite was something special. after dl'ing it and starting it, i see it is not.

PBP and me fav editor, Ultraedit, will still be a team.

JoeS,
i didn't realize how efficient the PBP compiler was. no problem sticking with it and this forum. the Melabs manual is well, a bit odd, but this forum has helped and keeps helping.

for basic & PIC's, i'll stick with the PBP compiler.

i will say i do like the mikroE IDE but from what i can tell it's compiler isn't near as efficient as PBP's. it almost looks like the use the same across their C, pascal & basic compilers, making for a lot of overhead. can't swear to it, but it looks like it on the surface of things.

thanks for the input!

[Archangel]

There is an advantage C has using variables which are not global, whereas all PBP's Variables are, so you lose a little space, still PBP makes some pretty tight code (so I'm told by others who should know ).

[Free_Flow]

I have used both Pbpro and Proton, now I only use Pbro for old project support and all new work is in Proton. This opinion on the differences is my own thoughts, I do not want to get into a flame war over it!!

IDE
The IDE looks the same as in both compilers but Proton has plug-ins. This enables people to write add-ons like PDF management systems, wizards etc.

But an IDE is just an IDE and note pad will do if you have to.

The compilers both do not support reusable variables, however this has never been a problem for me as I can keep in my mind what is used were and have never run out of variables.

The both do not support functions etc. But my coding style is such that I never need them a gosub is all that is needed. Functions have over heads and they can really take a toll on code space so even if they had them I would not use them.


Code usage/ Speed etc
Proton code is smaller and this can make a big difference with large apps.
Proton is faster due to the above but no one would notice. Your coding style would make a much bigger influence on both code space and speed.

Variable types etc
Proton supports all Pbro does and adds Floats. Pbpro support for Dwords or longs is a waste of resources. As soon as you use Longs code usage goes through the roof as all sums etc are done as a long. Proton is a much better compiler when using larger variable sizes

Commands
All the usual stuff are there in both. Proton adds GLCD support so if you want to start a project using a GLCD your better off in Proton. I find Protons support for USB easier than Pbpro but thats just me I'm sure others will disagree. Proton now adds a Pre-processor in the next release to add to macros.

Forum support
I see that Pbro has more basic coding questions, Proton you get a lot of discussions on non coding related stuff. It might just be me but they seem to be more willing to pass code around. Pbro has more users so they should be more help on hand. I have never ask so cannot comment on that to much.

Price
Well Proton is better value but you have to look at the whole package, what else do get in the way of support. I cannot comment on that as I do not have the need for that much.

I use Proton a lot with other packages like ISIS for its VSM which make the whole project experience a lot easier.

Ultimately both are long established products with a good history.

[Archangel]

I have used both Pbpro and Proton, now I only use Pbro for old project support and all new work is in Proton. This opinion on the differences is my own thoughts, I do not want to get into a flame war over it!!

FLAMES . . . No . . . Horseraces . . . Woo Hoo make Papa rich !<br>
Very glad you are satisfied with Proton, good to have options, and if I'm not mistaken that's a Crownhill product, our forums sponsor.