CCS, HI-TechC, MikroC , MPLAB C.....Which C Compiler is the BEST???

[Tre]

I have used C18, PICC, and CCS quite extensively.  I actually prefer CCS despite it's non-ANSI syntax.  It is extremely easy to get up and running and there is more of a C like feel than C18 and PICC.  PICC and C18 seem like ASM macros to me!

[engr.humair]

It depends upon the avaliablity of Information on each compiler

[fuflogen]

imho CCS (not PCD) is the best for fast start programming,
now I have to use C18 compiler but I like CCS, it's "more user friedly" I think...

[reynaldo]

i'm using mikroc.it has got wide library.i used hi-tech previously,but it is hard for beginning.

[emulento]

PICC from CCS rules.

[spkt]

i think that CCS is so wonderful for beginner

[avlober]

I always use de IAR Compiler, es very clean, but it don´t support all micros ;(

[lyk]

Begin with MickoC, very easy program in studying! 

[suresh kumar]

i use mikroc i havnt had a problem so far.

[memed500]

microc very useful.

[leandrohuff]

CC5x create code with very good optimization, easy integration with MPLAB or other free editor tools.

[WAYNE25]

Hi,i think mplab y ccs c are the best

[ZioFester]

Hello,
i use C30, C18, HT but now i use MikroC. C18 and C30 are very good but they have not clear documentation. bye    

[shobits1]

use of ease and with many driver libraries i prefer the ccs as best and if your project is a comercial industry standard product i prefer hitech and if it is for pic18 and dspic i prefer mplabc because it from their own product microchip. :)Use ccs for basic,easy, & quick projects.

I agree with raham, but i prefer hitech

[CDT]

CCS is my choice(version 4.058)

[ZioFester]

Hi,
With MikroC there are many already ready bookcases and in more the compatibility with the C is maintained. The various CCS has BUG experiments to you son arrived to version 4,20 and has changed. MickroC works well and answers perfectly to the requirements. If they need other bookcases they can create or copy from other compilers.
To fine the compilers son nearly all bonds but on blot some to 8-bit see them waste to you. I only use them in order to implement complex functions like those logical mathematics or. For the rest I go in Assembler. Language C I see more to it adapted for machine which 16-32-bit PIC24-dsPIC30-dsPIC33 type and new model PIC32 or ARM acrchitecture. For these structures it nearly needs completely a language to high level.
For the PIC18 already the speech changes. The PIC18 is a machine with more complex structure and difficultly the more complex management of the stack and the PC regarding the PIC16 can be managed from a assembler in how much is structures type, therefore one language C is one optimal solution.
At the moment language C that it supports of the BEES in order to manage a RTOS is the CCS but many of the RTOS in Internet supply already these bookcases. as an example the PICOS18 is one of these. For the PIC18 the C18 is written in C using.
Now the speech is divided in 2: if you must manage the machine directly or if you must manage it through a RTOS. Based on these considerations you see which he is compiler C more adapted
Gone and programmed... most possible... 

Posted on: January 29, 2008, 01:47:47 13:47 - Automerged
In order to render account you of what I have said visited care RTOS the address = http://www.picos18.com/ . I have not still tried this several RTOS but it seems good and full of Driver for peripheral the ready ones to be it uses you. Bye 

[etm503]

I personally have used CCS for all projects, basic and commercial alike. Only problem are the bugs and the many revisions which are hard on each others' heels. I currently find a challenge with CCS when I have multiple interupt handling like I2C, RS232 on Uart and external interupts on B0 taking place concurrently. Not sure if this compiler limitation or just my programming skills, but I have tried many options.

[fdx]

i use ccs c

[wnmaximino]

I like MikroC because MMC library!
Very easy to beginner!

[rtm]

I have used HT-PIC PICC - it was stable. But PICC18 makes a lot of problem to me - too many bugs, I have to check a lot of old versions before I found correct one.

[engvidal]

  to fast learning, ccs is the better. I use it to teach pic.

[TA5CT]

I like C. is it not important which kind of use to compiler editor? They have many different superiority for them. But all compiler's language type is C.

[chronus]

Having tried all the of the compilers mention in the topic, I find CCS by far the best (aside from some annoying bugs). The generated hex is MUCH smaller than what HI-TECHs packages can do, and the seamless integration into MPLAB allows me to keep using my ICD2 without purchasing additional hardware.

I just wish CCS would abandon their attempts to create a gui (version 4 is pretty ugly), and just make the compiler an Eclipse plugin. This way the linux version could have a gui, and moreover they could port it to mac too!

What are users experiences here with the command line linux CCS compiler? good .. bad?

[baba]

I use CCS 3.x and it is good enough for my simple applications. I think that it is good for a beginner and a lot of functions are directly available like rs232.

[Orcino Borges]

Hi, i tested MikroC and is very good and more cheap.