What compiler do you use?

Stuart Dootson

(5) F# (on my installation)

Ed Poore

Tim Craig wrote:

Microchip C18

Ouch! I've used Microchip stuff in the past (ok, mainly their assembler rather than C and it was a tricky b****** too).

I have no idea what I just said. But my intentions were sincere.

Mike Dimmick

For various different projects: Microsoft C 6.0 Visual C++ 1.52c Visual C++ 6.0 Visual Basic 6.0 Visual Studio .NET 2003 (C#, VB.NET, C++) eMbedded Visual C++ 3.0 (ARM compiler) eMbedded Visual C++ 4.0 (ARM compiler for CE 4.2, CE 5.0) Visual Studio 2005 (C# 2.0, some C++ for Windows Mobile 5.0 and desktop x86) The choice depends on the project's requirements. We still do some work on DOS-based handhelds, although normally porting to Windows CE or Windows Mobile and then checking that the changes still build correctly for the original unit - that covers C 6.0 and VC++ 1.52. We have an application server written in VB 6.0, and to avoid problems with multiple C++ runtimes loaded in the same process, we build its helper components in VC 6.0.

Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder

Dan Neely

403. And a haiku?

-- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.

Gordon Brandly

Tim Craig wrote:

Microchip C18

It's such an open-ended question, I was tempted to answer with: B. Knudsen CC8E and see if anyone here would know what I was talking about. After reading your answer, though, I think now maybe at least one person would! :) Actually, my full answer would be more like: C++Builder 5 Visual C++ 6 Visual C++ 7.1 Visual C++ 8 Knudsen CC8E Borland C++ 5.02 ...and a few others, though the ones above are what I use regularly these days.

Gordon Brandly

Mike Dimmick wrote:

Visual C++ 1.52c

We have a copy of that around here, but I don't think anyone has ever used it. I use Borland C++ 5.02 for our embedded-DOS equipment, because I've always liked its IDE and decent 16-bit compiler. On the other hand, I've just started using the Visual C++ 2003 and 2005 IDEs regularly a couple of months ago, and now I must say I'm pretty spoiled. I've even gone to the trouble of figuring out how to get my microcontroller C code (using the Knudsen CC8E compiler) to build in Visual Studio 2005, just to get the Intellisense Advantage (tm?). Nice!!!! (I'm too old to say "Sweet!", but don't want to properly date myself by saying "Far out!".)

Tim Craig

Ed.Poore wrote:

Ouch! I've used Microchip stuff in the past (ok, mainly their assembler rather than C and it was a tricky b****** too).

It hasn't been too bad. The compiler handles a lot of the nasty things like dealing with paging of memory. I didn't have any choice in the matter. I coach a FIRST high school robotics team and that's what we're given. The biggest hassle was just dropping back to C from C++ and whining why can't I do that. :sigh: The worst part was this season when they switched to an 18F8722 chip for the controller which had a bunch of silicon errors in the interrupt system and timers. Even with the fixes my code never ran right although it was fine on an older 8520 chip.

The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.

Tim Craig

Yeah, I decided to play smart ass since he was expecting a bunch of compilers for Windows. I do have Visual C++ installed but that would be such a ho-hum answer and I rarely use it since I retired.

The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.

Ed Poore

Tim Craig wrote:

what we're given

That always seems to be the way with Microchip, you never choose them but are always given PICs to work with. :rolleyes:

I have no idea what I just said. But my intentions were sincere.

Roger Wright

TurboASM

"...a photo album is like Life, but flat and stuck to pages." - Shog9