CCS C Software and Maintenance Offers
FAQFAQ   FAQForum Help   FAQOfficial CCS Support   SearchSearch  RegisterRegister 

ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

CCS does not monitor this forum on a regular basis.

Please do not post bug reports on this forum. Send them to CCS Technical Support

OT- Moving to PIC18

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CCS Forum Index -> General CCS C Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Gabriel



Joined: 03 Aug 2009
Posts: 1067
Location: Panama

View user's profile Send private message

OT- Moving to PIC18
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 7:30 am     Reply with quote

Hey guys,

I am about to "Class Up" into PIC18, and I am about to buy this:

https://www.olimex.com/Products/PIC/Development/PIC-MAXI-WEB/
And this:
PCH Command-line C Compiler : 52112-320

The boards' PIC is: 18F97J60

I was wondering if anyone had used that board/compiler/chip combo before?

Im particularly interested in exploring web conected devices, and how CCS supports or doesnt the internet of things...

I see most of the available example codes for that board are in C18... i am wondering if CCS provides drivers/examples etc..


I appreciate any recomendations.

I already have PCM Command-line C Compiler - V4.135 and its been great with MPLAB so i dont forsee any issues with using command line compilers for PIC18... I would really like to continue with CCS.

G.
_________________
CCS PCM 5.078 & CCS PCH 5.093
asmboy



Joined: 20 Nov 2007
Posts: 2128
Location: albany ny

View user's profile Send private message AIM Address

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 8:13 am     Reply with quote

i have had good luck with ccs 1.141 and the 18f8723 - but never had to deal with more complex PICS as of yet.

my take is that in general , CCS support for newer, complex PIC architectures takes a few releases to become solid.

i have been lucky in that i have not had to migrate to 3.3v architectures, NOR need to bother with messy stuff like integrated ethernet, USB or CANbus. my condolences if you are needing to work with any of those integrated peripherals


Very Happy Very Happy

and if U R familiar with the 16F887 - then consider the 18f4620- for which CCS has superb support- and migration is a snap......
Gabriel



Joined: 03 Aug 2009
Posts: 1067
Location: Panama

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 8:28 am     Reply with quote

Hi thanks for your input!

i dont _need_ to work with higher end PICs but I feel like i need to catch up.

I recently presented my first comercial project (simple sensor data aquisition), but felt a bit outdated explaining why I only offered output in RS-232.
Especially since the client wondered if i could offer anything with Ethernet.

... I get the feeling your opinion is that CCS is not quite there yet for more integrated PICs...

Thanks,
G.
_________________
CCS PCM 5.078 & CCS PCH 5.093
asmboy



Joined: 20 Nov 2007
Posts: 2128
Location: albany ny

View user's profile Send private message AIM Address

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 8:36 am     Reply with quote

rs-232 + FTDI chips
== USB connectivity with widely supported host drivers. Very Happy Very Happy

BTDT got many happy clients Very Happy
Gabriel



Joined: 03 Aug 2009
Posts: 1067
Location: Panama

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 8:50 am     Reply with quote

yeah, I use FTDI chips extensively...

In that particular project I made 17 DAQs with Analog inputs+relays+integrated PSU... etc... and they all had to talk to the main automation system of the building (a hotel).. the units were placed in remote locations IP54 rated boxes surrounded by motors and pumps etc... where because of cable lentgh USB was not practical... also fiding host USB ports on the closest PLCs was not really an option.

anyways...ethernet is a big motivator for me to switch.

EDIT: IP54.... im used to typing 67 at work...
G.
_________________
CCS PCM 5.078 & CCS PCH 5.093
newguy



Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Posts: 1907

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 9:17 am     Reply with quote

asmboy wrote:
[snip]...NOR need to bother with messy stuff like integrated ethernet, USB or CANbus. my condolences if you are needing to work with any of those integrated peripherals


CAN is probably one of the easiest things to work with UNLESS you're trying to create something that interfaces with a vehicle's CAN system.

Actually CAN is my favourite communication scheme because it's so reliable and virtually everything involved with the transmission or reception of a message is all done for you in hardware. Love that aspect of it.
bkamen



Joined: 07 Jan 2004
Posts: 1611
Location: Central Illinois, USA

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 6:29 pm     Reply with quote

I've done projects with PCH and the 18F97j60 with no problems.

Now -- I tend to use C18 or now XC8 because the 97j60 is an ethernet PIC and Microchip has long since moved on from TCPIP STACK v3.75 which is what CCS supplies as their TCPIP Stack. ugh.


-Ben
_________________
Dazed and confused? I don't think so. Just "plain lost" will do. :D
Gabriel



Joined: 03 Aug 2009
Posts: 1067
Location: Panama

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 7:32 am     Reply with quote

Hi Bkamen,

thanks for your input...
did you have any problems with peripheral support as Asmboy describes? (aside from the old TCP/IP Stack)


G
_________________
CCS PCM 5.078 & CCS PCH 5.093
bkamen



Joined: 07 Jan 2004
Posts: 1611
Location: Central Illinois, USA

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 9:49 am     Reply with quote

Gabriel wrote:
Hi Bkamen,

thanks for your input...
did you have any problems with peripheral support as Asmboy describes? (aside from the old TCP/IP Stack)



Not that I can remember.

To be honest, the last time I compiled the CCS TCPIP Stack to run on a PICdem.net2 was probably a good 3 yrs ago.

It's a reasonably mature part though at this point. You may find a bug or two.. you may not.

Hope that helps,

-Ben
_________________
Dazed and confused? I don't think so. Just "plain lost" will do. :D
asmallri



Joined: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 1634
Location: Perth, Australia

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website

Re: OT- Moving to PIC18
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 11:26 am     Reply with quote

Gabriel wrote:
Hey guys,

I am about to "Class Up" into PIC18, and I am about to buy this:

https://www.olimex.com/Products/PIC/Development/PIC-MAXI-WEB/
And this:
PCH Command-line C Compiler : 52112-320

The boards' PIC is: 18F97J60

I was wondering if anyone had used that board/compiler/chip combo before?

Im particularly interested in exploring web conected devices, and how CCS supports or doesnt the internet of things...

I see most of the available example codes for that board are in C18... i am wondering if CCS provides drivers/examples etc..


I appreciate any recomendations.

I already have PCM Command-line C Compiler - V4.135 and its been great with MPLAB so i dont forsee any issues with using command line compilers for PIC18... I would really like to continue with CCS.

G.


If you are looking to use Ethernet as a general platform and are moving from a PIC16 then I suggest bypassing the PIC18 all together and going to the PIC24/dsPIC33 family and use an external Microchip ENCx24J600 Ethernet controller. This will give you full duplex 100Mbps Ethernet as opposed to 10M Ethernet. There are some switches that do not support 10M Ethernet (it is now pretty old) so why start your development with a legacy implementation?

The PIC24/dsPIC family is a far superior platform for developing Ethernet class applications due to its larger amount of RAM, better register architecture, hierarchical interrupt structure, alternate interrupt vector tables etc.
_________________
Regards, Andrew

http://www.brushelectronics.com/software
Home of Ethernet, SD card and Encrypted Serial Bootloaders for PICs!!
bkamen



Joined: 07 Jan 2004
Posts: 1611
Location: Central Illinois, USA

View user's profile Send private message

Re: OT- Moving to PIC18
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 7:22 pm     Reply with quote

asmallri wrote:


If you are looking to use Ethernet as a general platform and are moving from a PIC16 then I suggest bypassing the PIC18 all together and going to the PIC24/dsPIC33 family and use an external Microchip ENCx24J600 Ethernet controller. This will give you full duplex 100Mbps Ethernet as opposed to 10M Ethernet. There are some switches that do not support 10M Ethernet (it is now pretty old) so why start your development with a legacy implementation?


That's true -- but it's a more complex implementation.

I have to give the 97j60 credit for being a one chip solution.

Quote:

The PIC24/dsPIC family is a far superior platform for developing Ethernet class applications due to its larger amount of RAM, better register architecture, hierarchical interrupt structure, alternate interrupt vector tables etc.


I wish MCHP would make a PIC24 w/ethernet without the 2chip solution.

Additionally, the 97j60 can use addtional FLASH in the EBI mode.. (but again, more silicon)

In any case, I agree -- but I also can see some remaining merit to the 97j60.

All depends on the application/cost/etc...

-Ben
_________________
Dazed and confused? I don't think so. Just "plain lost" will do. :D
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CCS Forum Index -> General CCS C Discussion All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group