ME Labs getting Lazy?

[rwskinner]

Honestly, I'm not trying to start a war or debate, however I've used Pic Basic and Pic Basic Pro for many years off and on and always loved it. Especially with the MicroCode IDE.

I bought the compiler mainly so I could get right down to business and write code and knock out projects quickly and it has always done that, until now.

Now, it seems like everytime I turn around, there are work arounds or limits or lack of support as far as the library and still no parameter support.

For Instance,
A lot of other compilers have built in modbus, CAN, and LIN support. Things that a lot of folks use everyday. In PicBasic Pro I was forced to write all this from scratch. No problem, I can, and I did but it has me wondering if that is something I really need to be spending my time on.

When it came to CAN, ME Labs said there was no standard so therefore they had no plans to support it. That was an easy way to just avoid it. There is indeed a standard for CAN messages, and besides, you only need the functions to send out data and to get data, no decode the message contents.

Anyways, I started playing with 18F devices and I get PM doesn't support these devices and I have to use MPASM. Ok, cool, but now all the defines are different, and the tracking down compiler errors is not easy, at least for me. So I spend the time to gid thru the include files trying to determine how to setup the fuses properly. More time spent that should not be required!

Now MPASM gives me some crazy error and then I have to dig thru the mac file and it's all greek to me. I don't plan on learning ASM or do I plan on digging thru mac files. I still have no idea what the error is. It provides a line number but still no clue.

Is it me, or have these guys just taken a back seat, Continue to support some new devices when they came out and just collect money from what crowd they have left?

I'm a little hot under the collar right now, but this sure seems like a kludge if I ever seen one. Are all the 18F and future devices going to be handled the same way?

Fire away, surely I'm not the only person that feels this way am I?

[tenaja]

1. I have always gotten very fast and accurate tech support when I've called MELabs. I'd even spend the little money to call overseas if I knew I'd get the phone support that good.

2. PBP is a Basic Stamp alternative, and little more. It is totally optimized for ease of use and foolproof code, not power, speed or efficiency.

3. You need to read your data sheets on how to set up your fuses.

I have never used PM--started with MPASM from the beginning--so I do not know what your issues are. Perhaps you could post some and some folks can offer suggestions.

Why not try the free version of Swordfish for your 18F project? I hear it is great, but only for 18F Pics. Proton compiler is also pretty good, and they have recently made updates.

[Melanie]

No, MeLabs isn’t getting lazy. People are getting lazy. Folks want more for less – it's understandable. They want a single easy instruction for everything from pulling out a single byte from a variable length GPS Data string through to wiping their arse whilst using the least amount of bog-roll (olde-English verbage).

Features that Person-A wants, isn't what Person-B wants. Each of us wants our personal favourite things to make our lives easier. Those that are capable, like you have with CAN, have gone away and done it, those that can't moan about lack of features.

Look what's happening already... people can't use the features they've got. They haven't a clue. They live for Cut and Paste from example code without a blindest idea of what they are doing, and then moan when it doesn't work. Despite the best efforts of others to teach, in the majority it falls on deaf ears. The last week just as an example has seen so many questions that could be answered by searching the forum, reading the manual or looking at the Datasheet.

Craps, if there was a forum for screwdrivers, people will be posting equivalent questions of "I’ve got one with a funny star-shaped end, and my screw has a slot, how can I get it to fit?" That is exactly what is happening here. We are now at a stage where people that don't know the first thing about electronics, components or programming, are trying to build complex projects. So why does the compiler error when somebody tries to use ADCIN on a 16F84? Well the obvious answer is "You’ve got an old version of the Compiler so it's time you upgraded" – geeze, I was really tempted to post that answer! Have we really all descended to this level?

I'm NOT MeLabs, I’ve absolutely nothing to do with them other than we share the first four letters of our name. But if I was, I'd answer something along the lines of "We provide you with a tool that works, that contains a certain set of features, if that tool doesn’t suit your purpose, then there are others that might". You buy a standard, tried and tested, reliable and solid family car from Toyota and you want to go rallying. You can (a) ask Toyota to sell you something to fit your purpose (which if you put enough money down on the table they'll be more than happy to do), or (b) you can customise and tune it up yourself (if you have the skill-set)... or (c) you buy a different car. Actually, there's also option (d) which is to bitch and moan but that's just totally unproductive as it doesn't get you anywhere.

With regard to the Compiler... option (a) throw money at MeLabs, I'm sure for the right price they'll design-in anything you want. This forum proves that option (b) works. Option (c) is however the easiest.

[rwskinner]

Melanie,
I agree with you and like I said, for the most part I've just built what I needed. The datasheets can be pretty confusing and you can't expect everyone in the world to understand them, without some help and practice.

Back on the compiler. I guess my biggest fustration was that the Chipset Defines are all broken, and I have to comment out the defines in the Picbasic Inc File then go dig thru the P18Fxxxx.inc file and do all these work arounds.

WHY? I can see this being an issue with maybe an outdated compiler package because things changed but it this still all required for the newer versions or is it something we will always have to live with?

How do other vendors do it. Back to the company x and company z don't require you to do this....

[Melanie]

No, I have to agree with you in part, but I can see where MeLabs is comming from...

1. If you are an Amatuer/Hobbyist, the default (18F defines for example) that you 'unpack out-of-the-box' allow the majority of the uninitiated to get the product to work in some form or other.

2. Once you spill beyond basics into more custom designs, one hopes you have gained a sufficient knowledge now to be able to go beyond the basics and edit up your INCs and things. *sigh* I know, it's not perfect. Even as a Pro (no, I don't stand on street corners!), it trips me up sometimes. There's nothing more irritating to throw some code together, chose a new PIC that you haven't used before, and get a face full of compiler errors reminding you that you haven't edited that INC file.

Ideally, what MeLabs could do, is have a compler switch eg /i (for /ignore or /idiot) which would cause the compiler not to use the default settings in the INC file and take it all from your program instead. It's not that difficult to parse a command line and impliment, and I always thought I'd get around and do it... but it's lack of time and I'm not that involved in day-to-day programming to bother anymore.

[Pedro Pinto]

Hello

You can use Atmel controllers with programming language Bascom, that is very identical to PBP pro but more, more powerfull.

Regards
Pedro

[OS5N]

Last time I touched Basic programming language was in the late 70's. There is not enough neurons left today ( I am 74 YY ) to retain a four pair of dozens assembler instructions! Some one told me try " mel pic basic ". I went through the intruction of the Mel Pic Basic and thought I would give it a try to develop some simple Amateur Radio applications as the instruction are still understood and remaining in my old brain...but YOU PEOPLE FRIGHTENED ME a bit reading this thread.... So, shall I go on, buy the STANDARD version and proceed. Need rs232 protocol to communicate with other Ham programmes on PC who run under VISTA...! A lcd screen prefered to show part of configuration of the interface, and showing for some functions what it is doing in real time. Thanks for a shout, and as I request often, dont tell Shakespeare about my bad English, Willy would'nt appresciate.

[mackrackit]

I have been hanging around here for a long time, you get used to being FRIGHTENED!

You mentioned in another post something about USB. I do not think the standard version will handle the 18Fs and that is what you will need for USB.

Go with the pro, you will be happier in the end.
http://www.microengineeringlabs.com/products/pbp.htm

Ham. What is you call. I am still a tech. KE7ITC.

I have been wanting to play with APRS.

[rwskinner]

Don't be scared, it's a great tool and is perfect especially for starting out. Easy to use and easy to understand. Some of the stuff we were talking about really isn't an issue. I was more/less banging my head and whining when I shouldn't had been.

Go for, grab the compiler and get your feet wet, you'll love it.

Richard

[Archangel]

Last time I touched Basic programming language was in the late 70's. There is not enough neurons left today ( I am 74 YY ) to retain a four pair of dozens assembler instructions! Some one told me try " mel pic basic ". I went through the intruction of the Mel Pic Basic and thought I would give it a try to develop some simple Amateur Radio applications as the instruction are still understood and remaining in my old brain...but YOU PEOPLE FRIGHTENED ME a bit reading this thread.... So, shall I go on, buy the STANDARD version and proceed. Need rs232 protocol to communicate with other Ham programmes on PC who run under VISTA...! A lcd screen prefered to show part of configuration of the interface, and showing for some functions what it is doing in real time. Thanks for a shout, and as I request often, dont tell Shakespeare about my bad English, Willy would'nt appresciate.

Hi OS5N, absolutely nothing to be timid about, just some internal whining amongst family, PBP is a very robust programming language, this thread was about people wanting ever more canned features, so as not to have to write them themselves, if you can already program in gw basic or qbasic you are 2/3 of the way there already, most everything is the same or similar. I believe PBP is somewhat easier than PB std. to use.
JS