Post by thread:C or BASIC for the PIC?

The only BASIC for the PIC that I am aware of is the MicroEngineering labs PIC BASIC compiler. There may well be others. This compiler is mainly meant to emulate the BASIC STAMP 1 instruction set with a few extensions. In this role it does an excellent job and it is possible to write some very useful code using it. HOWEVER !!!!! - you will rapidly find yourself coming up against its limitations once you start to get "serious". Anything which requires timing of some action plus another action simultaneousl;y or anything even vaguely approaching a "real time" system gets extremely difficult (if not impossible). You will need then to descend into assembler for the tricky bit and at that stage will probably find yourself fighting the compiler. Most C language compilers are less easy for a total novice to start off with but will not limit you in anything like the same manner. MEL also have a "professional" BASIC coming soon (maybe already here?) which MAY solve some of the existing products problems. -----Original Message----- From: Adi <spam_OUTadiTakeThisOuTsioux-lookout.LakeheadU.Ca> I'd like to do some high level language programming on the PIC. Am I better off using C or BASIC? I have no prior C experience but did some BASIC programming on a Commodore 64 15 years ago. I have no experience doing anything for a PC but I'd like to do that too some time... Thanks, Adi

I'd like to do some high level language programming on the PIC. Am I better off using C or BASIC? I have no prior C experience but did some BASIC programming on a Commodore 64 15 years ago. C will look better on your resume... Seriously, the PIC basics are so specialized for embedded applications that they're not a lot more "transportable" to other architectures and other basics, while the C compilers are closer to something that could be called "standard." On a PIC, you (probably) won't get to the complexities of the languages that usually fuel flame wars. That said, there's a lot to be said for the parallax basic-stamp type of system. Not so much because it's BASIC, but because the whole "in circuit programmable, host based compiler, eeprom" scheme of things lets you turn around application changes VERY quickly. BillW

Are you aware of any 'inexpensive' C compilers for the PIC? And a good source of beginners information on C? I've looked at some of the websites offering C compilers but there doesn't seem to be anything under several hundred dollars.... And thank you for your reply! Adi {Quote hidden}> The only BASIC for the PIC that I am aware of is the > MicroEngineering labs PIC BASIC compiler. There may well be > others. This compiler is mainly meant to emulate the BASIC > STAMP 1 instruction set with a few extensions. In this role > it does an excellent job and it is possible to write some > very useful code using it. > HOWEVER !!!!! - you will rapidly find yourself coming up > against its limitations once you start to get "serious". > Anything which requires timing of some action plus another > action simultaneousl;y or anything even vaguely approaching > a "real time" system gets extremely difficult (if not > impossible). You will need then to descend into assembler > for the tricky bit and at that stage will probably find > yourself fighting the compiler. > > Most C language compilers are less easy for a total novice > to start off with but will not limit you in anything like > the same manner. > > MEL also have a "professional" BASIC coming soon (maybe > already here?) which MAY solve some of the existing products > problems. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Adi <.....adiKILLspam@spam@sioux-lookout.LakeheadU.Ca> > > I'd like to do some high level language programming on the > PIC. Am I > better off using C or BASIC? I have no prior C experience > but did > some BASIC programming on a Commodore 64 15 years ago. I > have no > experience doing anything for a PC but I'd like to do that > too some > time... > > Thanks, > Adi >

Russell McMahon wrote: > MEL also have a "professional" BASIC coming soon (maybe > already here?) which MAY solve some of the existing products > problems. Yep: http://www.dontronics.com/pbpro.html Don McKenzie donKILLspamdontronics.com http://www.dontronics.com Don's Download Dungeon http://www.dontronics.com/download.html For more details, send a blank message to .....infoKILLspam.....dontronics.com or EraseMEsimstickspam_OUTTakeThisOuTdontronics.com or basicsspam_OUTdontronics.com

Adi wrote: > > Are you aware of any 'inexpensive' C compilers for the PIC? And a > good source of beginners information on C? I've looked at some of the > websites offering C compilers but there doesn't seem to be anything > under several hundred dollars.... > > And thank you for your reply! > Adi $99USD http://www.dontronics.com/ccs.html Don McKenzie @spam@donKILLspamdontronics.com http://www.dontronics.com Don's Download Dungeon http://www.dontronics.com/download.html For more details, send a blank message to KILLspaminfoKILLspamdontronics.com or RemoveMEsimstickTakeThisOuTdontronics.com or spamBeGonebasicsspamBeGonedontronics.com

Hi! I looked at the site. There's sure something I'll find that will work! Do you know of any good material (book, website) to get started in C programming? Thanks! Adi {Quote hidden}> > Are you aware of any 'inexpensive' C compilers for the PIC? And a > > good source of beginners information on C? I've looked at some of the > > websites offering C compilers but there doesn't seem to be anything > > under several hundred dollars.... > > > > And thank you for your reply! > > Adi > > $99USD > http://www.dontronics.com/ccs.html > > Don McKenzie TakeThisOuTdonEraseMEspam_OUTdontronics.com http://www.dontronics.com > > Don's Download Dungeon http://www.dontronics.com/download.html > For more details, send a blank message to RemoveMEinfoTakeThisOuTdontronics.com > or simstickEraseME.....dontronics.com or EraseMEbasicsdontronics.com >

Adi, My suggestion is to start with (buy) a Basic Stamp. The BS1 has a full basic compiler, available for free, and it pretty much uses the same basic that you are familiar. They also have a BS2 that has more memory (2k) and faster (20Mhz) There is some differences than C-64 basic, but by getting the APPLICATION Notes (Free), you can learn the flavor of basic. I just finished up a project using a commercial Basic compiler. You can add Assembler and Basic to accomplish any task. Without a background in C, you probably don't want to tackle it on the Microcontroller level. There are too many comprimises working on a small platform. I learned C on the IBM PC (Borland Turbo C). And then transistioned over to the micro platform. Parallax has all the information you will want to break into the microcontroller arena. Don't think the Basic Stamps are toys. They are full fledged PIC Processors, with basic interpreters built into them. They contain, on a single module, a 4 Mhz Clock, EEPROM, RAM, and the PIC Processor. You use a basic compiler on a P.C. and then plug in a cable (Parallel cable for a BS1, and a Serial Cable for BS2), Upload the program you wrote, disconnect the cable, reset, and the program runs. Pretty neat, huh? Parallax makes a kit that contains a Stamp, an instruction book, a cable, a carrier board, and instructions. You can buy it from Digikey, Jameco, or direct from Parallax. After that, you can buy a PICSTART programmer, and program directly to a PIC. More work, but you can then mass produce your project. I just read that for the BS1 Stamp, there is a feature to upload the program directly to a One Time programmable PIC Micro. That means, you can use your Stamp as a development system, and then download it to a cheap ($5-$7) One Time Programmable chip. check out Parallax webpage. http://www.parallaxinc.com This is my opinion. Good Luck...Eric At 06:58 PM 2/13/98 +0000, you wrote: >I'd like to do some high level language programming on the PIC. Am I >better off using C or BASIC? I have no prior C experience but did >some BASIC programming on a Commodore 64 15 years ago. I have no >experience doing anything for a PC but I'd like to do that too some >time... > >Thanks, >Adi > >