Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [jallist] newbee questions!

Expand Messages
  • Malcolm Crabbe
    Hi, To be honest I find PicBASIC Pro better for several reasons, mainly because it is so well documented with good examples in the manual. Mind you you would
    Message 1 of 11 , Jun 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi,

      To be honest I find PicBASIC Pro better for several reasons, mainly
      because it is so well documented with good examples in the manual. Mind
      you you would expect nothing else from a commercial program costing
      almost £200

      Jal scores in the fact that its free, open source code. But this can
      lead to many "versions" of library files, and some aspect of some chips
      don't have jal routines so you have to jump out to asm. Maybe these
      points will be addressed in the next version of Jal, I don't know.

      Both have active forums an user groups, so support is very good

      Malcolm

      Stanley Grixti wrote:

      >Hello friends
      >
      >
      >
      >I am new to jal and pic in general but I am very willing to learn
      >
      >
      >
      >I have done several pic projects however they where based on what I call
      >"parrot" programming as I basically compiled already written software !
      >
      >
      >
      >However I have quite a good idea of what's going on with compiling and
      >programming the chips
      >
      >
      >
      >My first questions are:
      >
      >
      >
      >1. As a beginner is it advisable to start in JAL or should I learn a
      >more low level language as assembly , C or PicBasic
      >2. is it best to use a development board or software emulation should
      >be sufficient to get going?
      >
      >
      >
      >My main interests lye in amateur radio / tv applications so what I'm after
      >mainly is LCD's / I2C Bus / RS232 / A2D ect
      >
      >
      >
      >Thanks
      >
      >
      >
      >Stanley Grixti
      >
      >9H1LO
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Gordon Williams
      ... From: Stef Mientki To: Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 6:40 PM Subject: Re: [jallist] newbee
      Message 2 of 11 , Jun 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Stef Mientki" <s.mientki@...>
        To: <jallist@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 6:40 PM
        Subject: Re: [jallist] newbee questions!


        > > 2. is it best to use a development board or software emulation should
        > > be sufficient to get going?
        > >
        > >
        > AFAIK, there is no reliable software emulator / simulator,
        > so you'll always ask yourself, is it my program or the simulator.
        > And as I said I'm biased, the Rapid Prototyping Board is the best ;-)
        >

        Of course there are reliable simulators. As far as I'm concerned, one
        should *always* run the code through a simulator prior to loading it into a
        PIC. That is unless you have lots of time to waist and don't mind getting a
        few more gray hairs ;) It allows you to catch silly mistakes that take
        hours to debug otherwise. Once you know that your program is operating
        exactly as you expect it and you have tested any critical timing routines
        you can then load it into a PIC and then concentrate on hardware problems
        and any misunderstandings you may have with communication protocols that you
        are using.

        I take the asm file output from Jal and use MPLAB for the simulation. A
        small learning curve but well worth the effort.

        Also if you are starting, develop small modules each of which should do
        something specific and be tested seperately. Put the modules together to
        create an application.

        Regards,
        Gordon Williams
      • Edwin Cini
        Hi Stanley, I see you are Maltese like me! :-) My recommendation is to get started with a high level language. Jal is easy to learn, and I guess so would be
        Message 3 of 11 , Jun 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Stanley,

          I see you are Maltese like me! :-)

          My recommendation is to get started with a high level language. Jal
          is easy to learn, and I guess so would be PicBasic. I have no
          experience with the latter though.

          Once you get used to writing programs using a high level language,
          you won't find it too hard to dabble with assembler. I often embed
          assembler snippets in my Jal programs, wherever some extra
          speed/small code size is needed.

          For simulation and debugging you can use MPLAB, but all work there
          will be revolving around assembler. In my opinion there is no
          substitute to a real chip on a breadboard!

          Check out wouter's intro to PIC programming.

          http://www.voti.nl/blink/index.html

          It is the ideal thing to get the ball rolling while understanding
          what is happening.

          Cheers!

          Edwin
          (ex 9H5YO)

          --- In jallist@yahoogroups.com, "Stanley Grixti" <stanley@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hello friends
          >
          >
          >
          > I am new to jal and pic in general but I am very willing to learn
          >
          >
          >
          > I have done several pic projects however they where based on what I
          call
          > "parrot" programming as I basically compiled already written
          software !
          >
          >
          >
          > However I have quite a good idea of what's going on with compiling
          and
          > programming the chips
          >
          >
          >
          > My first questions are:
          >
          >
          >
          > 1. As a beginner is it advisable to start in JAL or should I
          learn a
          > more low level language as assembly , C or PicBasic
          > 2. is it best to use a development board or software emulation
          should
          > be sufficient to get going?
          >
          >
          >
          > My main interests lye in amateur radio / tv applications so what
          I'm after
          > mainly is LCD's / I2C Bus / RS232 / A2D ect
          >
          >
          >
          > Thanks
          >
          >
          >
          > Stanley Grixti
          >
          > 9H1LO
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • Stef Mientki
          ... No typo ... ... High Level Language means for me that a human person, with the less possible a-priori knowledge, can understand it. So JAL is definitely
          Message 4 of 11 , Jun 1, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            >> Nice to hear that you call C and PicBasic more low level languages,
            >> but I can agree with you ;-)
            >>
            >
            > Do you mean "can't" isn't it ?
            >
            >
            No typo ...
            ... High Level Language means for me that a human person, with the less
            possible a-priori knowledge, can understand it. So JAL is definitely
            more HL than C.
            btw C is often called HLA ;-)

            cheers,
            Stef
          • Stef Mientki
            ... I hope so ... ... and I hope to hear your opinion again in a few weeks ;-) cheers, Stef
            Message 5 of 11 , Jun 1, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Malcolm Crabbe wrote:
              > Hi,
              >
              > To be honest I find PicBASIC Pro better for several reasons, mainly
              > because it is so well documented with good examples in the manual. Mind
              > you you would expect nothing else from a commercial program costing
              > almost £200
              >
              > Jal scores in the fact that its free, open source code. But this can
              > lead to many "versions" of library files, and some aspect of some chips
              > don't have jal routines so you have to jump out to asm. Maybe these
              > points will be addressed in the next version of Jal, I don't know.
              >
              I hope so ...
              ... and I hope to hear your opinion again in a few weeks ;-)

              cheers,
              Stef
            • Stef Mientki
              hi Gordon, ... Well I didn t found them, except my own of course, but that only yields for me, because I m the only one knowing the weak points ;-) ... well
              Message 6 of 11 , Jun 1, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                hi Gordon,


                > Of course there are reliable simulators.
                Well I didn't found them, except my own of course,
                but that only yields for me, because I'm the only one knowing the weak
                points ;-)
                > As far as I'm concerned, one
                > should *always* run the code through a simulator prior to loading it into a
                > PIC. That is unless you have lots of time to waist and don't mind getting a
                > few more gray hairs ;)
                well I'm totally gray already ;-)
                > It allows you to catch silly mistakes that take
                > hours to debug otherwise. Once you know that your program is operating
                > exactly as you expect it and you have tested any critical timing routines
                > you can then load it into a PIC and then concentrate on hardware problems
                > and any misunderstandings you may have with communication protocols that you
                > are using.
                >
                > I take the asm file output from Jal and use MPLAB for the simulation. A
                > small learning curve but well worth the effort.
                >
                > Also if you are starting, develop small modules each of which should do
                > something specific and be tested seperately. Put the modules together to
                > create an application.
                >
                Exactly, and that's why there are no good simulators ;-)
                You should always debug on the highest level (preferable the idea or
                concept level), but at least at the level at which you wrote the code !!
                And thus is MPLAB completely worthless if you're writing JAL code.

                cheers,
                Stef
              • Vasile Surducan
                ... mainly ... manual. Have you tried to write your own jal manual ? I did. I also take a look into picbasic pro, and compared with jal is a little baby. Just
                Message 7 of 11 , Jun 1, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In jallist@yahoogroups.com, Stef Mientki <s.mientki@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Malcolm Crabbe wrote:
                  > > Hi,
                  > >
                  > > To be honest I find PicBASIC Pro better for several reasons,
                  mainly
                  > > because it is so well documented with good examples in the
                  manual.

                  Have you tried to write your own jal manual ?
                  I did. I also take a look into picbasic pro, and compared with jal is
                  a little baby. Just because it has libraries already done, and you
                  have to live with that version.
                  The power of an open source compiler is diversity. When you say
                  you've written the best library/procedure you realize other's is
                  better. And you discover many different sources, like maybe jalV2
                  which is other point of view of the same old jal.


                  Mind
                  > > you you would expect nothing else from a commercial program
                  costing
                  > > almost £200
                  > >
                  > > Jal scores in the fact that its free, open source code. But this
                  can
                  > > lead to many "versions" of library files, and some aspect of some
                  chips
                  > > don't have jal routines so you have to jump out to asm. Maybe
                  these
                  > > points will be addressed in the next version of Jal, I don't know.
                  > >

                  ***BE SURE*** that this will not be ever solved
                  (see Stef's desperation...:)
                  A compiler with one set of library is like an EU apple, nice, big but
                  without any taste.

                  greetings,
                  Vasile



                  > I hope so ...
                  > ... and I hope to hear your opinion again in a few weeks ;-)
                  >
                  > cheers,
                  > Stef
                  >
                • Gordon Williams
                  ... From: Stef Mientki To: Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 1:22 PM Subject: Re: [jallist] newbee
                  Message 8 of 11 , Jun 1, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "Stef Mientki" <s.mientki@...>
                    To: <jallist@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 1:22 PM
                    Subject: Re: [jallist] newbee questions!


                    hi Gordon,


                    > Of course there are reliable simulators.
                    Well I didn't found them, except my own of course,
                    but that only yields for me, because I'm the only one knowing the weak
                    points ;-)

                    Stef,

                    You might be interested in trying MPLAB then. Although not too feature rich
                    it gets the job done and is bug free (at least for the assembly and
                    simulation). When you recompile a JAL file, MPLAB will detect that the asm
                    file has changed and ask if you want to use the new file - a rather nice
                    feature.

                    I'm several releases away from the current MPLAB release so there may be
                    more features in the current release that I have yet to discover.

                    Regards,

                    Gordon Williams
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.