PDA

View Full Version : [SOLVED !] Too few devices in Lite Version?



Grege
13th July 2007, 05:06
Hi,
In considering migration from Picaxe to Pics and the PDS, I would like to try the suite first and check out programming etc.... See my other post.

But no devices in your list seem in any way suitable. 16F88 and 12F683 are the 2 Picaxe chips, and I have boards for these pin counts - can you enable either or both of these in the lite version? Would seem a good idea to have at least one Picaxe chip on your list.

The 16F877 that is closest is a 40 pin device - can I try to use that code even though it is unsupported, or will it prevent me from even trying?

(I'm sure the very small 50 line limit will still force anyone to buy your product for anything useful.)
Thanks, Greg

See_Mos
13th July 2007, 08:33
Hi Grege,

Welcome to the forum.

The whole point of the LITE version is to give you a sample of what is available when you buy the full version.

We are informed that Crownhill will shortly be releasing a new LITE version with different PIC's and higher limits.

Meanwhile just have a read of the help file and all those lovely commands which are available. That and this forum should convince you as to how good PROTON is.

P.S. Don't be put off by the banter and 'dry' humour on the forum:D

regards, Trevor

See_Mos
13th July 2007, 08:59
I found the thread I was looking for about the new LITE version:)

http://www.picbasic.org/forum/showthread.php?t=7365

Grege
15th July 2007, 21:16
Thanks SeeMos, clearly much soul searching on this one!!
I really want to prove my product is viable with this compiler and PIC chip just by programming the little bit that reads the IR code pulse lengths and storing them, which is too slow in the other chips / compiler. Must be an 18pin device to fit my board, with D/A, and like 16F88.
I'm pretty sure the improved clock speed and compilation should do it, but would be nice to prove it. The 50 lines should be enough, just, I'd say.
Maybe someone can help with a typical time a statement is executed in, on the 16F range at 4Mhz or 8M or higher, such as a do loop or poke - is it microseconds or 10's of uS or 100's of uS? Pulsin is the command intended to collect the incoming pulse width, but immediately (much less than a ms) after it collects one, it has to be ready for the next one, having written that value somewhere and gone around the looping.
Greg

C_Moore
15th July 2007, 22:20
Hi Grege,

I still use picaxe. Anyway post the code or send it to me and will compile it for what ever pic you want. I will say you can't go wrong getting PDS.

fanie
15th July 2007, 23:18
I have to agree with Charlie on this one. There is nothing to come close to the PDS - best investment I've made.

You can check the threads - see if you can find anyone not happy with it.

billyminor
16th July 2007, 03:07
I just bought it myself recently and I'am no programmer but it sure is worth every penny because of the thing's i've already made seemed quite easy to do with PDS compared another program I was using before but the support you'll get here is probably the best your going to find anywhere and that is woth the price,beside's it's on sale so get it while it's cheap you won't regret it I haven't.Like fanie say's read the threads I did and decided to buy it.
fanie there was 1 guy who wasn't happy but that was a really old thread:D

Grege
16th July 2007, 08:15
Hi folks, thanks for replies - a bit more specific info after some downloads and trying.
The simulation didn't look that hot to me, demos didn't run - gave an error - and overall looked an lot less convincing than the compiler. Simple things like the demo doesnt allow edits but as soon as you pick anything it puts in a device then says thats not allowed! And I already have other PCB / schematic software, don't really want to have another schematic & Spice system. Thinking this is a bit too cumbersome maybe...

(In fact after a quick check I decided the simulation was not even there, and VSM is a very expensive optional at hundreds of pounds, and I would need 2 versions to cover the 12F683 and 16F88 I want...Out of the question. Confused. Is ISIS simulation VSM or what? Really is not handy that you cant try it as you need, sorry)

Not trying to invoke any fire here, but have to say downloaded someone else's complier and simulator (that seems to me to be a whole lot better integrated) and it all fell into place very quickly... AND I could test my 2 chips I wanted right away. I can see their compiler is not as complete in its commands, but did feel a pretty complete system and adequate for me I'd say.
Greg

dolci
16th July 2007, 10:38
Not trying to invoke any fire here

Well, you started already pretty boy:mad: I just wish you are in the right path choosing unknown compiler.

RGV250
16th July 2007, 11:05
Hi,

I can see their compiler is not as complete in its commands, but did feel a pretty complete system and adequate for me I'd say.

Have you done a search on the forum to see what other users think of it, there are a lot of threads where people ask about the differences.
Most of the issues I see with the other compilers are lack of development. For me I do not even think about the 12 or 16 series PIC's as apart from low pin count I can not think of any advantage these have over the 18 series.
I would say, don't think about what you can do now but what you are going to be wanting to do in the future, you may be held back then?
The Swordfish compiler appears to be the only other one that has any real development going on but as it only caters for the 18 series and I may have to slum it a bit and use a 12 or 16 in the future I want one package that does it all.

Regards,
Bobby

See_Mos
16th July 2007, 11:23
I think that ISIS VSM demo was included to show what the compiler was capable of at the time that Proton IDE was released around August 2005.

Since then the compiler and the Basic language has had quite a few changes and the syntax used in some of the demos has been improved with the result that some of the examples might not now compile.

ISIS is an add on which is not actually needed and sometimes there is nothing like using the real thing. At the time the ISIS demo was included it was in version 6 which had some very quirky ways of doing things but now in version 7 it is much improved. Yes it is expensive but when time is money it is well worth the investment. If you don't need ISIS you might consider Tim's P-ICD which is a very usefull and low cost add on.

I think you will find that Proton will do everything that you need and can do a lot more than PICAXE can.

There are also regular updates which are free to download and you will get all the help you need from the users.

If you are still not convinced just wait around for the new lite version to be released and then decide.

Meanwhile if you have a particular problem with any of the demo's just give us a shout.

fanie
16th July 2007, 13:24
fanie there was 1 guy who wasn't happy but that was a really old thread
If I'm not mistaken he did get the PDS !


Not trying to invoke any fire here, but have to say downloaded someone else's complier and simulator (that seems to me to be a whole lot better integrated) and it all fell into place very quickly... AND I could test my 2 chips I wanted right away. I can see their compiler is not as complete in its commands, but did feel a pretty complete system and adequate for me I'd say.

You have to look in the long(er) run also - it could just be that the 2 pics you want to use now were featured conveniently... but what about the next and the next ? Then not even mentioning with what effort you can do what.

Anyway - in the end it's you who have to decide what you can live with or without :)

Grege
16th July 2007, 13:41
Thanks for feedback folks.
Yes I see lots of positive comments there, but the fact is I have now written, compiled and simulated the key bit of code and timing in the other one that has support for my chips in the demo.

Chips should arrive tomorrow or so, and I can program and test this routine, and I'm ready to commit to that.

So I guess its goodbye.... Forum response has been great thanks but demo didn't get me enough as it is.
Greg.

billyminor
16th July 2007, 17:44
Just for your info Greg I think I know which demo your talking about and after playing with it for a week I plunked down my money and bought PDS with no regret's because I find proton much easier to use but that's me and you might find the other one easier and as for simulators the real world has a way of throwing a monkey wrench in there and screwing up your code,In the end it's whatever work's for you I guess but I would take See_Mos's advice and wait till the new lite version arrives,