• AVR Freaks

Hot!Will MPLABX sink Microchip?

Page: < 12 Showing page 2 of 2
Author
rlkeck
New Member
  • Total Posts : 8
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2010/06/11 10:34:37
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Will MPLABX sink Microchip? 2021/02/17 09:16:02 (permalink)
+1 (1)
I agree with the original poster's observations. For me, another big disadvantage of Mplab X is that it unique to Microchip (most vendors typically have Eclipse based IDEs) so you need to learn yet another IDE. Because it cannot build on all the stuff being done for Eclipse it seems to be missing features such as variable live watch that is available for ARM processors with Eclipse based IDEs. Another real issue I have is Microchip charging to uncripple their compilers even though they are based on GPL3 code. While my favorite IDE is Visual Studio, I have to think that maintaining Atmel Studio is probably unsustainable in this age of if it doesn't run on Linux a lot of developers won't touch it.
Another issue that may be related to the fact that Microchip has gone it's own way, is their ARM parts do not seem to have MBED support. While MBED may not be for everyone, it is nice to have it as an available option.
I find the current Mplab X and Atmel Studio situation unfortunate. Microchip makes a lot of really nice MCU's, but increasingly, I am looking to other vendors that use mainstream tools.
To the person who suggested Arduino, I'd say you have to be kidding. Because Arduino provides a least common denominator view of the hardware, you cannot easily use most of the advanced features of modern MCUs. In addition, there is no hardware debugging and the IDE is so oversimplified it is worthless for all but the simplest projects.
#21
crosland
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 2202
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2005/05/10 10:55:05
  • Location: Warks, UK
  • Status: offline
Re: Will MPLABX sink Microchip? 2021/02/17 10:17:24 (permalink)
0
rlkeck
I agree with the original poster's observations. For me, another big disadvantage of Mplab X is that it unique to Microchip

 
It's NetBeans, open source, widely used. No more unique than any IDE in the embedded space. Every Eclipse IDE I have used for embedded had vendor specific features that had to be "learned".
 
Another real issue I have is Microchip charging to uncripple their compilers even though they are based on GPL3 code.

I wasn't aware XC8 was GPL.
 
For the ones that are, you can, as per the GPL license, build the compiler for yourself. The source is available from Microchip.
 
What you are paying for are the C libraries, which are not GPL, so you would need to provide these yourself. I may be wrong but I thing Microchip use DinkumWare.
 
 
#22
Antipodean
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 2052
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2008/12/09 10:19:08
  • Location: Didcot, United Kingdom
  • Status: offline
Re: Will MPLABX sink Microchip? 2021/02/17 11:56:03 (permalink)
+1 (1)
crosland
rlkeck
Another real issue I have is Microchip charging to uncripple their compilers even though they are based on GPL3 code.

I wasn't aware XC8 was GPL.

Its not GPL, it is the old HiTech compiler.
 
crosland 
For the ones that are, you can, as per the GPL license, build the compiler for yourself. The source is available from Microchip.
What you are paying for are the C libraries, which are not GPL, so you would need to provide these yourself. I may be wrong but I thing Microchip use DinkumWare.

 
There is more than just the libraries. To get the highest levels of optimisation there is a linked in module by Microchip that is not GPL, and you don't get that when you build the compiler yourself.
 

Do not use my alias in your message body when replying, your message will disappear ...

Alan
#23
jdeguire
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 624
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2012/01/13 07:48:44
  • Location: United States
  • Status: offline
Re: Will MPLABX sink Microchip? 2021/02/17 12:59:13 (permalink)
0
Dinkumware is used on XC32 for C++, but only for MIPS. ARM uses libstdc++. I don't know what's used on the other versions.
#24
Jan Audio
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 193
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2018/09/24 08:12:24
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Will MPLABX sink Microchip? 2021/02/18 10:14:55 (permalink)
0
Soon Linux will be big if windows10 becomes WAAS ( windows as a service ), you have to pay monthly for security-updates.
Maybe the software will run better in Linux ?, i know nothing about linux yet exept that its free.
So this is a dead road if you ask me.
#25
rlkeck
New Member
  • Total Posts : 8
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2010/06/11 10:34:37
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Will MPLABX sink Microchip? 2021/02/18 11:18:58 (permalink)
+1 (1)
MPLAB X is the only embedded dev environment I have used (and I've used quite a few) that uses Netbeans.
The other vendors' modifications to Eclipse generally are pretty much to accommodate whatever they provide as the Harmony equivalent. The code development environment with all the ones I've used is identical.
XC8 is the only exception to GPL and I have no problem if they want to charge for that although I think it is a stupid thing to do.
The C runtime library is independent of compiler optimization. You can swap C runtimes easily by specifying linker options. I believe for MIPS processors, there may be an additional optimization done by a separate utility which is not GPL. I have no problem with them charging for that. There is nothing that can be linked into the object code running on the target which can improve performance (this is NOT the same thing as saying there will not be performance differences among different versions of the same runtime library, i.e. NEWLIB may or may not be better than REDLIB). Building the compilers from scratch is not a realistic option for most. Charging to unlock all compiler optimizations is a violation of the spirit of GPL V3 and probably the letter.
From the GPL: "“Installation Information” for a User Product means any methods, procedures, authorization keys, or other information required to install and execute modified versions of a covered work in that User Product from a modified version of its Corresponding Source. The information must suffice to ensure that the continued functioning of the modified object code is in no case prevented or interfered with solely because modification has been made."
#26
NKurzman
A Guy on the Net
  • Total Posts : 19185
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2008/01/16 19:33:48
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Will MPLABX sink Microchip? 2021/02/18 11:44:48 (permalink)
+1 (1)
They chose Netbeans years ago, before Eclipse became the leader ( they also chose MIPS over ARM)
Switching to Eclipse would be expensive, And would t be that mush better.
As far as the Compilers, They are free.  You need to pay extra for advanced Optimization, or Safety Rating.  so they are offering what you are asking for.
Note: they upped the Free optimization level a while back.  So the Free compiler is better than it was.
#27
KTrenholm
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 863
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2012/08/08 14:04:23
  • Location: Connecticut, USA
  • Status: offline
Re: Will MPLABX sink Microchip? 2021/02/18 12:09:40 (permalink)
0
NKurzman
Note: they upped the Free optimization level a while back.  So the Free compiler is better than it was.



Is this across the board for all the XC compilers?  I could really use another free optimization level for a couple PIC24 projects (and haven't updated my XC16 version in quite some time, this would be a pretty compelling reason to do so).
#28
Antipodean
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 2052
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2008/12/09 10:19:08
  • Location: Didcot, United Kingdom
  • Status: offline
Re: Will MPLABX sink Microchip? 2021/02/18 12:36:21 (permalink)
+1 (1)
KTrenholm
NKurzman
Note: they upped the Free optimization level a while back.  So the Free compiler is better than it was.

Is this across the board for all the XC compilers?  I could really use another free optimization level for a couple PIC24 projects (and haven't updated my XC16 version in quite some time, this would be a pretty compelling reason to do so).



At one stage the free versions were limited to -O1, but of more recent times they have been able to use -O2. I believe this is across all three compilers.
 

Do not use my alias in your message body when replying, your message will disappear ...

Alan
#29
KTrenholm
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 863
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2012/08/08 14:04:23
  • Location: Connecticut, USA
  • Status: offline
Re: Will MPLABX sink Microchip? 2021/02/18 12:56:29 (permalink)
0

At one stage the free versions were limited to -O1, but of more recent times they have been able to use -O2. I believe this is across all three compilers.



3rd time is the charm (I had forgotten using your name eats posts, even WITH your very large signature):
 
You are correct, XC16 v1.61 lets me access -o2, where v1.31 only gives me -o1.
Was hoping it would buy me some extra program memory, but it actually uses more.  I assume this is how -o2 is expected to perform?  I'm not very familiar with the different optimization levels (the IDE only says "Optimize More").  I suppose I should probably make another thread for these sorts of questions...
 
Judging from another thread
Looks like -o2 applies speed optimizations at the expense of size, which is the opposite of what I need.  -os is what I want, performing -o2 without the size/space, but of course that's still locked behind pro
 
post edited by KTrenholm - 2021/02/18 13:28:58
#30
dan1138
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 4313
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2007/02/21 23:04:16
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Will MPLABX sink Microchip? 2021/02/26 15:26:01 (permalink)
+1 (1)
I would like to vent my spleen about something I just discovered in MPLABX.

Issue:

The "output to file" option from a right-click on the: "Window -> Target Memory Views -> Program Memory" output window does not work for an PIC24FJ256GA6060 MPLABX project imported from a HEX file.

When I try this it hangs forever, see attached screen shot.

I have tried MPLABX version back to 5.05 all hang in the same way.

MPLABX v4.xx seems to work correctly.

<rant>

What kind of code monkeys does Microchip use to create the Java like craplet extension to the Net Beans IDE?

How does this go undiscovered for years?

Come on Microchip, if you cannot hire good enough coders and testers for your IDE at least make it easier to integrate your compilers and debuggers that we pay for into an IDE that has competent maintainers.

</rant>

Attachment(s)

Attachments are not available: Download requirements not met
#31
Murton Pike Systems
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 247
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2020/09/10 02:13:01
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Will MPLABX sink Microchip? 2021/02/27 05:00:06 (permalink)
0
I recently got bogged down with doing my first interrupt routine with a PIC32mx
My code really should have worked but started doing crazy things.
I finally managed to get A2D interrupt working.
I then changed some code which stopped it working but putting back the code as it was didnt work !
In the end I started a clean project and copied my old app.c/app.h to the new project.
Its been working great since.
I dont usually have a lot of problems with PIC's or MPLAB X but this one was a nightmare.
 
#32
NKurzman
A Guy on the Net
  • Total Posts : 19185
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2008/01/16 19:33:48
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Will MPLABX sink Microchip? 2021/02/27 11:05:01 (permalink)
0
You can rent a compiler by the month.
So if you wanted to you could rent it for a single month to do the final optimization on your project.
Also if you’ve never used it before there is a 45 day evaluation that will give you the highest optimization. (I think it’s 45 days)
#33
Page: < 12 Showing page 2 of 2
Jump to:
© 2021 APG vNext Commercial Version 4.5