Jump to content

QBall

EstablishedMember
  • Content Count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About QBall

  • Rank
    Newbrie
  1. Using PicAntIDE 5.0.6 It would be very useful if the user (like me) would be able to change the hotkeys for compile, build, make, etc. My colleages and I have to work with other compilers like: Borland C++Builder 6.0 and Paradigm C++ which both have the ability to change the GUI to what we are used to. For instance: Compile project has alway been F9 within our company. Breakpoints are set with F5, etc. The ability to changes these settings (simply by changing an ini file) would make PicAntIDE more userfriendly than it already is.
  2. The proper term is source level debugging and it certainly would be great if this will be implemented. Let's hope so
  3. shouldn't you cast the variable x to a char? your returnvalue is a char, but the value x is unsigned long. Regards, Pim
  4. Using PicAntIDE 5.0.6 When creating a project with the wizard based on PIC16F876, the wrong headerfile is included. System.h checks all defines, but I guess that the define set for de default processor when creating a new project, is not undefined on selecting another processor. (or something like that) It is not a difficult bug to work around, just include the header file for the processor your using, instead of including system.h
  5. Hello, I've evaluated your C++ compiler and compared it with CSS PCW Compiler. I find your IDE much better then PCW and PCW does not support C++ but just plain C. (and a lot of preprocessor directives I would rather not have) You compared your product with CCS PCW Compiler and it does about the same (or even a little better) when it comes to being efficient. CCS compared their product with 4 other very unefficient compilers, but did not compare itself to your product. ??? So, about your compiler and your environment I can only say that it is nice to work with and it all seems to work ok. But what I would like to see in a future release is Source level debugging instead of stepping through assembly. Also I would like to run my source code on my own target with my own hardware, instead of simulating it all. Maybe you could contact microchip and ask them for specifications on how to communicate with a target through the ICD, ICD2 or ICE. (or all of them ) If you can make these enhancements you have designed a product which is far more advanced then any of the other suppliers and I am sure I would buy it, even it has to cost twice as much as it does now! I'll be waiting for your response, Best Regards Mr. P. Klanke Tildesign B.V. The Netherlands
×
×
  • Create New...