![](templates/subSilver/images/CCSLogo.jpg) |
![CCS C Software and Maintenance Offers](templates/subSilver/images/forumAd6.jpg) |
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
matrixofdynamism
Joined: 06 Dec 2010 Posts: 25
|
Why would one want to use CCS C Compiler plug-in in MPLAB |
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2015 1:57 pm |
|
|
I know that plug-in exists to add CCS C Compiler capability to MPLAB. I think that it will only work for compiling and thus generating a hex file but am not sure if a person can use debugging feature using that plug-in. Don't know :(
Similarly, plug-ins exist to add MPLAB functionality to CCS PIC C Compiler as well, I think.
I want to know the following 2 things.
1. Compared with using CCS PIC C IDE on its own, how much functionality does one have access to when using CCS PIC C plug-in but MPLAB as the GUI?
2. Why would one even want to do this at all? I mean just use MPLAB or CCS C compiler on its own. Why even use such plug-ins of this nature? |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
ezflyr
Joined: 25 Oct 2010 Posts: 1019 Location: Tewksbury, MA
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2015 2:05 pm |
|
|
Hi,
CCS offers two types of compilers, a 'command-line' version, and an IDE (Integrated Development Environment) version. I have the command-line version, which is really just the compiler 'engine', and I use MPLAB as my development environment. There is no need, or any useful reason, to use MPLAB with the IDE versions of the compiler.
John |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
temtronic
Joined: 01 Jul 2010 Posts: 9174 Location: Greensville,Ontario
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2015 2:17 pm |
|
|
I've used the MPLAB IDE almost 'forever'. 15+ years ago all my PIC code was assembler, then got PCM V2.5xx. MPLAB allows for multiple compilers and I can program PICs using PICkit3 or PICSTART+, yet it all looks 'similar'.
When I had a problem with MPLAB V8.6xx, the microchip tech didn't understand that I NEVER use 'debug' so he told me how to default to 'release' mode.
Guess I'm just an 'old school' guy but I do not upgrade if it ain't busted!
Jay |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Ttelmah
Joined: 11 Mar 2010 Posts: 19369
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2015 2:48 pm |
|
|
Yes. Historically I always slightly preferred the MPLAB development environment to the CCS IDE. Unfortunately, this has 'reversed' to some extent with MPLAB-X (whover wrote this should have their hands smashed with a sledgehammer, so they can never program again!...) - not that I dislike it you understand!... It is not quite as bad on a PC, as on the Mac. The Mac version seems almost unuseable, and full of bugs. For older chips that are supported by 'traditional' MPLAB, I still use it, and like the simulator, for just very gently working through some tiny area of code. For more modern chips, I've started to use the CCS IDE, since MPLAB-X, is just so bad. I also have full hardware ICE for many hundreds of chips. This 'runs rings' round ICD, with no change to the memory used etc., and the addition of scope grabbing and logic analyser type signal recording, without having to actually make any extra connections to the board. Unfortunately, support for the latest chips seems slower and slower in coming. This has plug-ins to run inside MPLAB, or MPLAB-X, but no ability to run in the CCS IDE. |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
RF_Developer
Joined: 07 Feb 2011 Posts: 839
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:47 am |
|
|
I use the CCS IDE most of the time. I use non-X MPLAB to support old ICDs and to support old code compiled with Microchip C (specifically TCP/IP stacks as the CCS stack support lags well behind - as in years - the Microchip stacks). I do NOT compile CCS code from MPLAB. |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
PCM programmer
Joined: 06 Sep 2003 Posts: 21708
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 10:09 pm |
|
|
Quote: |
1. Compared with using CCS PIC C IDE on its own, how much
functionality does one have access to when using CCS PIC C plug-in but
MPLAB as the GUI?
|
I don't know if a comparison chart exists for the CCS IDE vs. MPLAB.
You could go to the webpage for each one and try to compare them,
but that won't show the most important thing, which is ease of use,
and whether or not the IDE is annoying. You have to use it to tell that.
Featues of CCS IDE:
http://www.ccsinfo.com/content.php?page=compilers
Features of MPLAB-X
http://www.microchip.com/pagehandler/en-us/family/mplabx/
I can't find a features webpage for MPLAB vs. 8.92. This PDF has
some reasons why you would want to use an IDE. See page 26:
http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/MPLAB_User_Guide_51519c.pdf
Why is the older MPLAB vs. 8.92 important ? It's less annoying than
MPLAB-X, but doesn't support the very latest PICs.
Quote: |
2. Why would one even want to do this at all? I mean just use MPLAB or
CCS C compiler on its own. Why even use such plug-ins of this nature? |
Largely because programmers are lazy, or to put it another way, we
want to solve problems with minimal effort. With an IDE (CCS or MPLAB)
I can type in a program, edit the program, save it, compile it, debug it,
and program it into a PIC, and run it, all with very little motion of my
hand (I mean mouse usage). An IDE is just easier than running separate
programs to do each of these functions.
An IDE also allows you to organize everything into projects. That's
pretty important when you do a lot of PIC development.
Quote: |
I mean just use MPLAB or CCS C compiler on its own.
Why even use such plug-ins of this nature?
|
What's the alternative ? Dragging a source file on top of the CCS
compiler icon on your desktop ? Or running the compiler from a
Command Prompt window ? Nobody wants to do this.
Dragging a source file onto the CCS compiler icon to compile it.
This is "just using the CCS compiler on its own".
It's just too primitive. |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
|
|
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
|