From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1PI0hT-0002Di-GO for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:10:31 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 96AE9E087C for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:10:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from foo.birdnet.se (foo.birdnet.se [213.88.146.6]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A4B5CE06FA for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 14:53:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 6927 invoked by uid 501); 15 Nov 2010 14:53:21 -0000 Message-ID: <20101115145321.6926.qmail@stuge.se> Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:53:21 +0100 From: Peter Stuge To: gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-embedded] OT: HiTech-C question Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org References: <20101114211024.350fb808@osage.osagesoftware.com> <4CE117EC.5050704@tampabay.rr.com> <20101115073713.475b4adf@osage.osagesoftware.com> <20101114211024.350fb808@osage.osagesoftware.com> <4CE117EC.5050704@tampabay.rr.com> <4CE126AE.2@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101115073713.475b4adf@osage.osagesoftware.com> <4CE126AE.2@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 73b6fd87-bfc7-49d4-9b73-bacc874eacac X-Archives-Hash: e7fab63419e2563493d1357f3b3c1f6e Arkadi Shishlov wrote: > Isn't the arrival of really cheap ARM-s, like M0, puts PIC and AVR > and the like in legacy category you won't ever look again? Yes and no. For the very smallest jobs, I think the cheapest PIC still will beat an ARM by a bit. The PICs are also much smaller, physically. But I tend to agree. Used PIC since 90s, since starting with ARM don't really think that I will look back. > not to deal with PIC brain-damaging architecture is so relieving. Hahaha! :) I kindof like it. The skip instructions are funny. > People say, PIC-s are very robust and can handle a lot with theirs > bare pin-s, but still, does it really matter most of the times? Also a good point, the pins can sure take a beating. David Relson wrote: > At least one of HiTech's C compilers is gcc based. Their 32-bit > compiler documentation is a revised version of the gcc documentation. > If recollection serves I think I saw a copy of the GPL, though I > can't locate it right now. Yes, they started out using their own fork of GCC for PIC32 (as opposed to contributing support back into GCC) and since GCC is GPL they are forced to publish their sources, which they also have done. There was some community effort to clean it up and get it into GCC proper, I don't know the status of that. The C library is another story however. The C library that Microchip released for their PIC32 to the public at no cost artificially limits how large the application code can be. If you need larger you have to buy the full version. They can do this because the C library is separate from the compiler. > James, I'd appreciate your posting your PIC open source references. Here are some to get you started: http://gputils.sf.net/ # assembler and linker http://sdcc.sf.net/ # C compiler http://gpsim.sf.net/ # simulator http://www.linuxhacker.org/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi/1 # mailing list http://pikdev.free.fr/ # a GUI IDE The list is rather low volume, but has been around since 99. I would suggest to post there any and all questions, and I believe you will get good answers. //Peter