Buy the right compiler and programmer

GiG · Joined: 03 Sep 2021 Posts: 39

Hi, I wanted tips to buy a good programmer and hardware compiler that also has debugger capability with CCS.
Thank you.

temtronic · Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2021 6:25 am

First, you'll have to decide which 'family' of PICs you'll be using..16,18,24,32 ?
If for 'home or hobby' use, I'd think the 16 series,which requires a less expensive compiler than the PIC18 series, though years ago I decided on using JUST the PIC18F46K22 for 99.44% of all projects and products. At the time it had the most memories, peripherals and can run at 3 or 5 volts. Since then 100s of new PICs have come out, so maybe there's a 16 series that has those features you require, and future ones ?
While using a 40 pin PIC for most projects sounds 'silly', I've always had more than enough memory and pins for the projects, though 3 years ago, I used all but 1 I/O pin ! While it costs more than a smaller,cheaper device, over the years I've created an entire library of solid, known good, reliable code. New PICs and compiler versions may have 'quirks' or 'bugs' that may not appear for days or months. While newer PICs have some great features...do YOU really need them ? Often you can use and 'older' PIC to do the same task but..only YOU know what needs to be done.
Bottom line.... choose the HARDWARE first, then the compiler

GiG · Joined: 03 Sep 2021 Posts: 39

Thanks for guidance, I use the 16 series.
16F19

But I may go to 18 later, so if it supports both 16 and 18, it would be better for me.
Do you have any suggestions about the type of programmer? My focus is on the debugger with CCS.

Ttelmah · Joined: 11 Mar 2010 Posts: 19513

On the programmer, it depends massively on what you actually want to do.
So (for example), the Mach-X, can also function as a debugger, and has
the big advantage over the ICD units of programming chips directly in it's
socket. However if all the boards are going to have ICSP ports then a simple
debugger is cheaper. The ICD-U64, I find much more reliable than the
U80. This latter has improved as the software has been updated, but
still seems to have more issues, and is often not much if any quicker
(speed is limited by the actual time needed to program the flash itself,
rather than by the speed of the programmer). The 'Load-n-go' programmer,
is great if you want to program units that are not on your workbench.
Choice depends what you are going to do.....

GiG · Joined: 03 Sep 2021 Posts: 39

Ttelmah · Joined: 11 Mar 2010 Posts: 19513

Which connectors are different?.

The ICSP connector is the same connector used for ICD. A few chips
(some of the very small PIC16's etc.), have to have special debug versions
of the chips, because they have so few pins, that you can't really build a
usable unit without using the ICSP pins. However on 99% of the chips
all you do is use the ICSP pins if you intend to use ICD.
The connectors on both the U64 and the Mach-X are the same and you
just need a short cable to the ICSP port. If all programming is using the
standard ICSP connector, then the U64 gives fewer problems with 3.3v chips.
On the Mach-X, the older models have to have hardware changes for some
of the 3.3v chips (in some cases these can be DIY, while for others it has
to go back to CCS).

dyeatman · Joined: 06 Sep 2003 Posts: 1934 Location: Norman, OK

I have quite a few development boards without the RJ12 where I use an RJ12 to
ICSP adapter with my ICD-U64 and it works fine.

Here is a $5 one that I use:
https://microcontrollershop.com/product_info.php?products_id=5703

and there are a number of other sources.
_________________
Google and Forum Search are some of your best tools!!!!

bkamen · Posted: Fri Dec 03, 2021 3:18 am

I like the PIC18 and PIC24 series most of the time.

I tend to use an ICD3 and the PICkit3 and PICkit4. They work fine.

And the ICD has that 6pin modular (you should wiki for "registered jack" sometime...) which is easy to adapt to the 6pin ICSP header which is mostly what I put on my board designs.

In either case (i.e. you don't want the bulky 6pin modular connector), debugging is fine with the ICSP setup.
_________________
Dazed and confused? I don't think so. Just "plain lost" will do. :D

dyeatman · Joined: 06 Sep 2003 Posts: 1934 Location: Norman, OK

I agree. I use the 6 pin SIP rather than the RJ12 jack in all my designs.
I can fit that in most anywhere.
_________________
Google and Forum Search are some of your best tools!!!!

Ttelmah · Joined: 11 Mar 2010 Posts: 19513

Dead right.
The point is that there are five connections needed for the standard ICD/
ICSP operation. There are at least three 'connectors' commonly used to
carry these. The RJ12, a five or six pin SIL, and the Tag connect system.
They can all simply be adapted between using suitable cables.
The SIL connector is one of the simplest and cheapest. The Tag connect
system is smaller, but a bit fussy. The RJ, 'historically' was the commonest,
but is tending now to fall out of favour, largely because of it's size.
Choose whichever one you prefer, and stick with this. Get a cable for this,
and also for RJ12, in case you use something like one of the CCS boards.

PrinceNai · Joined: 31 Oct 2016 Posts: 479 Location: Montenegro

I always use a 6 pin 0,1"" SIL, labeled ICD with a big M for pin 1 on my PCB's. The sixth pin is extra, of course, but it is there to prevent some higher component to be placed there, interfering with the cable. And it is also way easier to read then the phone connector. No ups and downs, straight to the next one from pin 1.