Hello goes to each one
Hey guys, fellows, dadies, mamies, boys, and girls. What is this, you better shut this crap down.
As Bruce said, these compilers are just tools, I thought I will never use PICs, simply because I hated assembly in the earlier university days, especially that one for 8085, although I was the first in my class when it came to such subjects, I don't know, may be other students were in to girls more than studying !!
Any way, on my last graduate year, PICs were my 1st option when it came to my graduation project, so, I learned assembly, wrote lots of good codes, so what, I had no time to work on my graduation project if I want to use assembly, simply because its a time burning language.
Thank god guys, our project was based on team work, so I told my friends that if we stick with assembly, then our project will finish on the next year, so I started surfing the net, here and there, I found lots of documetaion on PICBasic Pro, so, I saved, borrowed, and won money to buy PICBasic Pro.
Hey guys I think you missed some thing here, when some good guys come here and say that they were PICBasic Pro users and now they are PDS users. Now think aboout it that way:
When a begginer in PICs looks for some thinng easy, nice, and to which a lot of documetation is dedicated, he will see that PICBasic Pro, is the man, there are lots of books, webs, and good people on many forums using PICBasic Pro, and the most important, they are willing to help each other, as the case is, here.
After they get started with PICs, and they write all codes they had in mind for PICs, and all their dreams become true, here is what happens:
While someone of us is writing a code for his lovely PIC MCU, he may need some features that are not available in PICBasic Pro, so, he quickly starts surfing the net, looking for a complier "TOOL" that supports his requirements, of course, the first compiler to collide with, is simply PICBasic Plus "PDS".
There is nothing wrong with that. Hey people, If you remember the reason for buying PICBasic Pro, the you will certainly know the reason why some previous PICBasic Pro users went to PDS, SIMPLY, increasing productivity, and development time saving issues. As if life clip repeats it self here. We ran away from assembly to PICBasic Pro, then when PICBasic Pro could not manage to do some thing PDS could, we ran away to PDS !!
This is the essence of problem, if we find some tool that save us brain tackling nuisance, we directly go for it, and forget that we were supposed to use assembly at the first place !!
So guys, cut this crap, instead of talking about this one is better, and this one is much better, you better start writing your own code for your projects whether you are a PBP or PDS user, doesn't matter. Melanie has taught me an important lesson, which is to get the project done, no matter how, just get the project done, whether you have to use a single command in PDS, or a complete page in PBP to drive a GLCD, the result is, you got your GLCD working, with the same code size, but by taking different highways, and brain tackling nuisance being nice when you finish
I don't know when the ghost of PICBasic Pro and PDS war vanishes, any way, no need for that in essence. What is the point coming her saying this one is ugly, bad, and good....
Have a nice ICDing
Bookmarks