Or the opposite I guess, free country and all that
Compiler development PIC32 or ARM --------Poll
-
aaronharper
- Posts: 38
- Joined: 30 Nov 2007 23:44
- Location: UK
Compiler development PIC32 or ARM --------Poll
It was recently announced that the MikroE team will soon start development on the PIC32 compilers, then the ARM ones will follow after an unspecified amount of time. If you want a MikroC that works with ARM before we get one that works with PIC32, shout out!
Or the opposite I guess, free country and all that
Or the opposite I guess, free country and all that
-
mikestefoy
- Posts: 7
- Joined: 09 Aug 2008 07:26
a vote, not that one was actually solicited by ME :-)
PIC 32 for sure
Count me in the PIC32 club. It only makes sense to provide a complete set of hardware/software tools for the newest Microchip product. Especially when you consider the price that the PIC32s are going to be selling at. I don't know if the low-end ARMs are going to continue to have a niche.
If you (mE) guys do support ARM eventually, I would suggest that you pitch it at the high end, and furnish GLCD libraries for the built-in QVGA and VGA controllers on the Samsung and Toshiba and Cirrus chips. The low end will be owned by the PIC32.
If you (mE) guys do support ARM eventually, I would suggest that you pitch it at the high end, and furnish GLCD libraries for the built-in QVGA and VGA controllers on the Samsung and Toshiba and Cirrus chips. The low end will be owned by the PIC32.
If you know what you're doing, you're not learning anything.
...just to report my 2 other cents about the PIC32 world, I worked a lot with 18F series, then moved to PIC24/dsPIC, at the moment I am evaluating the PIC32 with Microchip's actual compiler and the performances are impressive in the math calculations and, generally speaking, where there are strong integer calculations (like in cryptographic algorithms).
Other nice things, among the others, are the atomic bit set/clear (you can toggle I/O very very fast as much as the clock, very different from other high-end families) and quick context switch, I was able to get interrupts every one or two microsecond and to evaluate a bunch of instructions in the middle.
...and for those like me that appreciated a lot those 25 mA of sink/source from a PIC12/16/18...and afraid that dsPIC could only 4 mA...the PIC32 is able to sink/source 18 mA from all the I/O pins!
So, much easier to drive some small loads directly
I will be very happy to test the new PIC32 compiler from MikroElektronika!
The pinout is almost the same as the high-end PIC24H/dsPIC, so the porting of the PCBs will be really easy!!
picdog
Other nice things, among the others, are the atomic bit set/clear (you can toggle I/O very very fast as much as the clock, very different from other high-end families) and quick context switch, I was able to get interrupts every one or two microsecond and to evaluate a bunch of instructions in the middle.
...and for those like me that appreciated a lot those 25 mA of sink/source from a PIC12/16/18...and afraid that dsPIC could only 4 mA...the PIC32 is able to sink/source 18 mA from all the I/O pins!
So, much easier to drive some small loads directly I will be very happy to test the new PIC32 compiler from MikroElektronika!
The pinout is almost the same as the high-end PIC24H/dsPIC, so the porting of the PCBs will be really easy!!
picdog
... a proud user of MikroElektronica EasyPic3, EasyPic4, BigPic4, MikroC for PIC, EasydsPIC2, dsPIC-Pro2, LV24-33 and MikroC for dsPIC :)
-
MasterBlaster
- Posts: 165
- Joined: 25 Oct 2007 22:22
- Location: Wuppertal, Germany, Earth... :-)
- Contact:
Hello world... 
i also believe that pic32 is a good choice for use into the future... perhaps... or
was it Sinclair ZX80 or ZX81
- not?
...seriously, i vote also for PIC32 world...
i also believe that pic32 is a good choice for use into the future... perhaps... or
was it Sinclair ZX80 or ZX81
- not? ...seriously, i vote also for PIC32 world...
so long,
MasterBlaster.
Using: EasyPIC4 HW. Rev. 1.03, LCD- & GLCD Display, NetWork and SD/MMC Adapter,
reg. MikroC Pro for PIC 2009, PIC 16F877A, 18F452 and 18F4685 with 8/20 MHz Xtal.
MasterBlaster.
Using: EasyPIC4 HW. Rev. 1.03, LCD- & GLCD Display, NetWork and SD/MMC Adapter,
reg. MikroC Pro for PIC 2009, PIC 16F877A, 18F452 and 18F4685 with 8/20 MHz Xtal.
-
Jack Flanders
- Posts: 337
- Joined: 17 Apr 2008 02:53
- Location: Fantasy Land
PIC32, no question.
Why: there is already a thriving community of ARM stuff; lots of compilers and user groups. PIC32 adds competition to that and that always is a good thing. There are differences between the two, that is good also. If one family won't work for your special application, you have others to choose from. If PICs die out, the choices diminish. Not that PICs are going to die out anytime soon!
I really enjoy using mikroElektronika products and look forward to PIC32 support.
Just one more data point on the path...
Why: there is already a thriving community of ARM stuff; lots of compilers and user groups. PIC32 adds competition to that and that always is a good thing. There are differences between the two, that is good also. If one family won't work for your special application, you have others to choose from. If PICs die out, the choices diminish. Not that PICs are going to die out anytime soon!
I really enjoy using mikroElektronika products and look forward to PIC32 support.
Just one more data point on the path...
The dilemma with ARM is the same as with 8051. It's hard to provide a rich library when the hardware from the different suppliers is so different. If you just want a compiler, there's a GCC C compiler for ARM available for free. Much of the value that mE adds is in the libraries, and when you start writing peripheral-specific libraries, you can't necessarily expect them to work on all of the ARM type chips out there. At a minimum, there would need to be some way to write glue logic to make the library work with the intended target. That's messy.
That's why I suggested that any ARM compiler in the future be targeted to a few specific manufacturers, as I said at the upper end. I can't see the niche for the NXP ARM 7s, for example, when the PIC32 can do anything they can do for less money, and better performance.
What may be reasonable, is to bundle the GCC C compiler into an IDE, and the flash software for the ARM development board, and charge maybe $50 for the bundle, so that someone can be up and running without having to sort out the mess themselves. No (or minimal) libraries; just a bare-bones development environment that can instantly upload to the target.
That's why I suggested that any ARM compiler in the future be targeted to a few specific manufacturers, as I said at the upper end. I can't see the niche for the NXP ARM 7s, for example, when the PIC32 can do anything they can do for less money, and better performance.
What may be reasonable, is to bundle the GCC C compiler into an IDE, and the flash software for the ARM development board, and charge maybe $50 for the bundle, so that someone can be up and running without having to sort out the mess themselves. No (or minimal) libraries; just a bare-bones development environment that can instantly upload to the target.
If you know what you're doing, you're not learning anything.
My vote goes to PIC32...
Microchip has offered really attractive price for pic32. As for the performance wise, i can't say must as I've no experience in ARM.
I've bought a pic32 starter kit 6 months ago and i think it's pretty good kits and it offer some expansions kits too...
Hope ME can support their kits too...
Microchip has offered really attractive price for pic32. As for the performance wise, i can't say must as I've no experience in ARM.
I've bought a pic32 starter kit 6 months ago and i think it's pretty good kits and it offer some expansions kits too...
Hope ME can support their kits too...
-
mefleming55
- Posts: 55
- Joined: 27 Dec 2006 23:16
- Location: Portland, Oregon, Earth
- Contact:
