IOC on the 27k40

[longpole001]

yes i have also fallen in to the trap of using the pic chip that i know or limiting it selection to what PBP supports and also knowing it faster to do it in PBP than to start it in C where i am not as good at it

but the limits of PBP are always nagging me to move on to C permanently and the ability to port to large chips is major factor to drop PBP

8bit chips are so full of features but limited to 128k is major pain at times
richard reminds me is PBP is not great at many things and asm use is key routines are its major benefit

congrats on moving forward on c and MPLAP X

[mpgmike]

I design controllers for a living. It therefore behoves me to learn whatever is necessary to deliver the best product possible. I never went to school for programming, electronics, or anything else specifically tied to designing controllers. Out of necessity, I bought some books & started to learn basic analog electronics a tad over a decade ago. I designed several controllers using only analog ICs and quickly realized I was limiting my abilities without diving into the microcontroller realm. I then bought more books and learned to work with PICAXE.

Fast forward a few years, I usually read in the evenings as opposed to watching TV (we don't have cable or a dish). I am always studying something new, usually related to my work. Without formal training, it invariably takes me longer to get across the finish line than it does others with the schooling. Fortunately we live in the age of the internet. There are wiki sites, YouTube, forums, and a plethora of other resources available, in additional to the traditional books. It took me 4 years to finally get a controller talking to a laptop via USB (and then only with the help of HIDmaker), 2 years to be able to talk to a car via OBD II (using ELM327). My meager virtue is that I don't give up. I persist until I conquer, no matter how long or difficult it may be.

Many on this Forum dabble in electronics as a hobby. During the day they may be working on cars, fixing HVAC, processing data at the local court house, or whatever... in other words, they don't rely on electronics or PIC processors for their daily bread. For them, it's easier to deal with limitations than to conquer new worlds. I chose my career and absolutely love what I do. I have no regrets. But I also don't have the luxurious option of taking time away to attend formal schooling. Therefore the ball is in my court.

Decades ago a mentor impressed upon me to either give it everything I have, or don't accept the challenge at all. It's better to give it my absolute best than a mediocre attempt. Always strive to be the best in my field. I respect anybody that is willing to tackle a new challenge, especially when they're not forced to do so. Those on this forum that use PBP3 as a part of their hobby do so voluntarily. Any efforts spent on learning new things are for their personal gratification. I respect them way more than the person that just goes to work, comes home, eats dinner, then flops on the couch in front of the TV.

Having taken the scenic route to express a point, the punch line is: "to each his/her own". As for learning XC8, until you actually make a decision -- I mean commit to yourself that you're going to do it no matter what -- it will always just be that elusive "some day...". Once you make that commitment, you will probably find that it isn't a matter of being hard, just a matter of taking the time to go through the normal process of learning something new. You already did it at least once if you're using PBP3. It wasn't hard, it just took time.

[Ioannis]

I agree with you although I feel that all this (MPLABX IDE, C etc) is a steep curve. Time keeps me away from this and I guess for others too. Hobby is another thing and a hobbyist may have all the time to experiment.

Also I fell quite confident to start a new project anytime, very fast, with the MCSX and PBP. In no time the PIC is up and running without any cryptic syntax. With known limitations though.

Ioannis

[pedja089]

For same reason I stick to PBP+MPLAB X. And in more than one case I compared very similar programs in C(and microC) and PBP, and PBP is by far smallest. So you can do more in smaller IC.

[Ioannis]

Well, this is a bit subjective matter. Every C compiler is not the same, also has levels of optimizations, and even coding style can affect the resulting hex code size.

In any case here and then, testings show that PBP produces very compact code.

If Charles could further improve PBP with maybe functions, GLCDs, local variables and of course updating with new devices could help PBP to survive and evolve.

It really is a very good and trusty compiler, with no libs as C or Arduino-I know, but giving the user the ability to do his job. Easy, fast and reliable.

Ioannis

[Dave]

I agree 100% Ioannis...