Comments for Pilot's Logbook http://blog.flyingpic24.com Programming 16 and 32-bit microcontrollers in C. Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:59:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 Comment on Chapter 7-1/2 The I2C Interface by pilot http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/03/07/chapter-7-12-the-i2c-interface/#comment-175 pilot Tue, 08 Jul 2008 04:08:18 +0000 http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/03/07/chapter-7-12-the-i2c-interface/#comment-175 I will publish on the FlyingPIC24.com web site the best code modified specifically for the little GA002 that will be submitted. Any taker? I will publish on the FlyingPIC24.com web site the best code modified specifically for the little GA002 that will be submitted.
Any taker?

]]> Comment on Chapter 7-1/2 The I2C Interface by CDirenzi http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/03/07/chapter-7-12-the-i2c-interface/#comment-173 CDirenzi Tue, 01 Jul 2008 12:58:31 +0000 http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/03/07/chapter-7-12-the-i2c-interface/#comment-173 Hello, I have a PIC 24FJ16GA002 without the explorer board and I am trying to get an I2C EEPROM to work. I have read this tutorial, as well as chapter 7 of the book on SPI, and I can't seem to make anything happen. It seems like my code should be about the same as the code posted here, but I can't even detect any movement on the I2C pins. I noticed that there was a bug on Microchip's website that requires the I2C pins to be TRISed as outputs, but that didn't help. Are there any obvious differences between the 24FJ128ga008 on the explorer board and my PIC that would require different code, or configuration? Thanks! Chris Hello,

I have a PIC 24FJ16GA002 without the explorer board and I am trying to get an I2C EEPROM to work. I have read this tutorial, as well as chapter 7 of the book on SPI, and I can’t seem to make anything happen. It seems like my code should be about the same as the code posted here, but I can’t even detect any movement on the I2C pins. I noticed that there was a bug on Microchip’s website that requires the I2C pins to be TRISed as outputs, but that didn’t help. Are there any obvious differences between the 24FJ128ga008 on the explorer board and my PIC that would require different code, or configuration?

Thanks!
Chris

]]> Comment on LINUX catch-22 by dbishop http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/04/04/linux-catch-22/#comment-169 dbishop Fri, 20 Jun 2008 03:38:04 +0000 http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/04/04/linux-catch-22/#comment-169 Catch-22 indeed. But I don't understand the reluctance to release the tools/IDE source to the Linux community, especially the IDE. The tools are largely free already, and the open source improvements could feed right back into the Windows versions. For commercial product companies, using PICs with the "Pro C" would be a license issue, just as it is now -- if you want to use it for a production pay or face potential legal complications. For home project folks and students and the like, what difference to Microchip's commercial viability could it make to use the full compiler free of charge? I am reminded of Bill Hewlett and David Packard who encouraged engineers at Hewlett-Packard to take parts home for whatever use they could find -- they knew that it created a more productive environment and everyone benefited. I can't conceive of a scenario in which the Pro C tools or the IDE source, in and of itself, could mean the difference to Microchip's commercial viability or failure. If there truly are no Linux users, then releasing the tools source will be 'the sound of one hand clapping'; but if, on the other hand, there are people that will make it thrive, it will likely draw more users to the product line. Either way, it is a boon for all concerned. As an aside, I can tell you that I use many proprietary Windows-only tools -- Solidworks, Altium, etc -- but whenever there is a Linux alternative such as ModelSim, Xilinx and Altera tools, and the like, I always choose the Linux tools. And so does everyone I know. Catch-22 indeed. But I don’t understand the reluctance to release the tools/IDE source to the Linux community, especially the IDE. The tools are largely free already, and the open source improvements could feed right back into the Windows versions. For commercial product companies, using PICs with the “Pro C” would be a license issue, just as it is now — if you want to use it for a production pay or face potential legal complications. For home project folks and students and the like, what difference to Microchip’s commercial viability could it make to use the full compiler free of charge? I am reminded of Bill Hewlett and David Packard who encouraged engineers at Hewlett-Packard to take parts home for whatever use they could find — they knew that it created a more productive environment and everyone benefited. I can’t conceive of a scenario in which the Pro C tools or the IDE source, in and of itself, could mean the difference to Microchip’s commercial viability or failure. If there truly are no Linux users, then releasing the tools source will be ‘the sound of one hand clapping’; but if, on the other hand, there are people that will make it thrive, it will likely draw more users to the product line. Either way, it is a boon for all concerned. As an aside, I can tell you that I use many proprietary Windows-only tools — Solidworks, Altium, etc — but whenever there is a Linux alternative such as ModelSim, Xilinx and Altera tools, and the like, I always choose the Linux tools. And so does everyone I know.

]]> Comment on LINUX catch-22 by dmcomer http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/04/04/linux-catch-22/#comment-163 dmcomer Sat, 17 May 2008 18:58:24 +0000 http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/04/04/linux-catch-22/#comment-163 Interesting thread. I've often thought about adapting the C# Develop (or in Linux, the Mono Develop) environment, adapting the IDE for use with GNU C and Microchip tools. Better yet, wouldn't it be great if Microchip worked with the PIC community on such a project in a vein similar to Microsoft's open source initiative (e.g. nUnit, sandcastle, etc.). The usability issues MPLAB has (no, I'm not trashing MPLAB, it's a good tool and the price is right), feature enhancement, etc. may be resolved quicker and allow the user to tailor the environment to suite their needs. I realize that MPLAB has IP build in, but it seems that there must be a way (obfuscated code in a Microchip supplied dll for example) that remain IP yet stream line the IDE. This would seem to reduce cost of development for Microchip. By the way, will we see you at this years Master's? Interesting thread. I’ve often thought about adapting the C# Develop (or in Linux, the Mono Develop) environment, adapting the IDE for use with GNU C and Microchip tools. Better yet, wouldn’t it be great if Microchip worked with the PIC community on such a project in a vein similar to Microsoft’s open source initiative (e.g. nUnit, sandcastle, etc.). The usability issues MPLAB has (no, I’m not trashing MPLAB, it’s a good tool and the price is right), feature enhancement, etc. may be resolved quicker and allow the user to tailor the environment to suite their needs. I realize that MPLAB has IP build in, but it seems that there must be a way (obfuscated code in a Microchip supplied dll for example) that remain IP yet stream line the IDE. This would seem to reduce cost of development for Microchip.

By the way, will we see you at this years Master’s?

]]> Comment on Setting the configuration bits by Mike Morris http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/01/15/setting-the-configuration-bits/#comment-33 Mike Morris Fri, 11 Apr 2008 02:48:53 +0000 http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/01/15/setting-the-configuration-bits/#comment-33 correction .. .. not "PRIPLl" correction .. .. not “PRIPLl”

]]> Comment on Setting the configuration bits by Mike Morris http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/01/15/setting-the-configuration-bits/#comment-32 Mike Morris Fri, 11 Apr 2008 02:47:30 +0000 http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/01/15/setting-the-configuration-bits/#comment-32 from configuration chapter online... " _CONFIG2( FNOSC_PRIPLl & FCKSM_CSDCMD & OSCIOFNC_OFF & POSCMOD_HS)" .. maybe a typo but "PRIPLL" worked for me .. not "PRIPLL" by the way .. nice book Mike from configuration chapter online…
” _CONFIG2( FNOSC_PRIPLl & FCKSM_CSDCMD & OSCIOFNC_OFF & POSCMOD_HS)”

.. maybe a typo but “PRIPLL” worked for me .. not “PRIPLL”

by the way .. nice book

Mike

]]> Comment on Flying along the Salt River by pilot http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/01/20/flying-along-the-salt-river/#comment-7 pilot Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:56:43 +0000 http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/01/20/flying-along-the-salt-river/#comment-7 Thanks for your nice words. There is in fact already a Microchip hosted forum available for the PIC24 users (beginners and experts): All Forums >> [16 bit Microcontrollers & Digital Signal controllers] >> PIC24 Topics Here is a shortcut: http://forum.microchip.com/tt.aspx?forumid=179 Although if you were suggesting that I should manage a book-specific forum ... I am not sure I am ready to sign up for so much work. You would need to clear it with my wife first! :D P.S. Readers' emails to the pilot@flyingpic24.com are always welcome though and I try hard to respond to everybody as fast as I can. Thanks for your nice words. There is in fact already a Microchip hosted forum available for the PIC24 users (beginners and experts):
All Forums >> [16 bit Microcontrollers & Digital Signal controllers] >> PIC24 Topics
Here is a shortcut: http://forum.microchip.com/tt.aspx?forumid=179
Although if you were suggesting that I should manage a book-specific forum … I am not sure I am ready to sign up for so much work.
You would need to clear it with my wife first! :D

P.S. Readers’ emails to the pilot@flyingpic24.com are always welcome though and I try hard to respond to everybody as fast as I can.

]]> Comment on Flying along the Salt River by vanila http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/01/20/flying-along-the-salt-river/#comment-6 vanila Sun, 24 Feb 2008 09:43:04 +0000 http://blog.flyingpic24.com/2008/01/20/flying-along-the-salt-river/#comment-6 Hi, I read your flying with PIC24 book. Your book provides me with strong basic knowledge of programming pic in C and its architecture. Since this is my first time flying with PIC programming-beginner level, i would like to suggest for you to provide a forum for this books reader, so it would enable both of us (readers-writer) to make maximize profit by changing ideas and knowledges. Best regards, Vanila.fevret Hi,
I read your flying with PIC24 book. Your book provides me with strong basic knowledge of programming pic in C and its architecture.

Since this is my first time flying with PIC programming-beginner level, i would like to suggest for you to provide a forum for this books reader, so it would enable both of us (readers-writer) to make maximize profit by changing ideas and knowledges.

Best regards,
Vanila.fevret

]]>