| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
oyhan
Joined: 03 Jun 2005
Posts: 21
Location: TURKEY
|
| ICD DEBUGGER |
 Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 2:38 pm |
 |
|
Hi
I am a new CCS's user. But I do not have an ICD debuger. May I make a CCS ICD circuit especialy usb model or serial model. Can you help me please.? I think I need some scheme, pcb and Pic's code for ICD. Best regards.. |
|
 |
Guest
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 8:28 pm |
|
|
I have two ICD-U40. Very small and nice. But it isn�t a panacea. You should first use a bootlader (Tiny Bootloader is one of the best). It�s a lot faster and easier to use (of course you can�t do debugging).
Then buy an ICD and you�ll see -if you are pretty good programmer- what have just told you about it.
It�s better, cheaper, and faster to learn programming in C, and use a bootloader.
Mark.- |
|
|
Mark
Joined: 07 Sep 2003
Posts: 2838
Location: Atlanta, GA
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:18 pm |
|
|
| Anonymous wrote: | I have two ICD-U40. Very small and nice. But it isn�t a panacea. You should first use a bootlader (Tiny Bootloader is one of the best). It�s a lot faster and easier to use (of course you can�t do debugging).
Then buy an ICD and you�ll see -if you are pretty good programmer- what have just told you about it.
It�s better, cheaper, and faster to learn programming in C, and use a bootloader.
Mark.- |
Well he didn't say he wanted to make a programmer and a bootloader would be more like a programmer than and ICD Debugger so I would disagree with you. And an ICD2 is faster than any debugger in downloading code and no way a bootloader is better than an ICD. |
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 6:04 am |
|
|
Mark,
If you are a good programmer, you don�t need an ICD.
Apart, I think it is not very well designed: It uses RB6, RB7 and (maybe) RB3 -> You loose half of the RB4:7 ints on change !!
There should be another way........
I don�t agree with you at all. |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in
