5 ms·

Compiled tips 'n tricks guide for PIC microcontrollers (2009) [pdf]

kens 7y ago
I thought an old document on the PIC microcontroller would be entirely pointless to read, but most of these tricks are applicable to microcontrollers in general.
- leggomylibro 7y ago
  PICs are also very low-power and low-cost. They still have a bit of a niche in the world of modern microcontrollers, unlike some popular 8-bit MCUs that I could name...
- segfaultbuserr 7y ago
  Most are circuit configurations, the code is generic, this is why the title I used to submit it was "PIC Microcontroller Circuits", not Microcontroller. Usually the original title should always be used to discourage clickbaits, however, in cases like this example, I think it's justified to add relevant context. Unfortunately, the moderators overcorrected it and removed circuits.
amelius 7y ago
Anybody succeeded in using open source tools to program PIC microcontrollers? Is it easy to create a USB (slave) interface through this route?
- nitrogen 7y ago
  I created a USB IR transmitter using a PIC microcontroller, but the pure-assembly USB stack I used was created by a professor at a school I don't recall and had no license agreement, so I did not open source it. I used the assembler from gputils, a PICKit for initial flashing (before all of my hardware was stolen), and there was a bootloader so most of the time flashing occurred over USB.
- Zardoz84 7y ago
  There is a Arduino clone using PICs. Pingüino Is called. all open source. I made one using the older not PIC32 version and worked very fine.
analog31 7y ago
The 8-bit PIC microcontrollers won the love of hobbyists for a number of good reasons. In particular, the PIC16C84 and PIC16F84 chips had EEPROM/Flash memory that eliminated the need for an ultraviolet erasure stage. They were available in DIP packages that were easily handled. The documentation and programming tools (just an assembler at first) were approachable. The input/output pins were fairly robust, so the chips were hard to kill. The power supply voltage range was forgiving, and allowed for easy operation from batteries. The 8-bit PIC architecture lacked some features that frustrated writing a proper C compiler for the chips. But that wasn't a problem if you moved up to the 16- and 32-bit processors, which also had some lovely peripherals such as a 12-bit A to D converter. I programmed my first PIC16C84 chip using a programming circuit that I built myself through the parallel printer port of my MS-DOS computer, using a program that I wrote in Turbo Pascal. I was hooked. Those were the days. Since then I've moved on to chips and boards that can be programmed using the Arduino tool chain.
- bsder 7y ago
  You forgot "Ran a BASIC interpreter". 8-bit PIC's were used a LOT for "glue" tasks. Sequencing powerup, initializing complex chips, period status reporting (like battery voltage), etc. I have seen quite a lot of really complex, expensive boards with a tiny PIC hidden somewhere away on the board to control it all. The 8-bit PIC's were also a quick way to slap a UART on a board that you could use to query all the things on your board. Finally, the PIC18 series were actually innovative in many ways for the time. For example, they had USB and Ethernet interfaces in cheap chips long before anybody else did.
- zokier 7y ago
  > The 8-bit PIC microcontrollers won the love of hobbyists for a number of good reasons. And I'd argue lost it with lack of open source compiler support. > But that wasn't a problem if you moved up to the 16- and 32-bit processors Microchip is selling XC licenses ($1500 and needs a dongle) for 16 bit PICs, because there is still no gcc/clang available. This in a universe where msp430, avr, and arm (and many others) all have good upstreamed gcc support. So I say it's still a problem. 32-bit PICs are just MIPS cores so they have at least some degree of support via that.

kens 7y ago

I thought an old document on the PIC microcontroller would be entirely pointless to read, but most of these tricks are applicable to microcontrollers in general.

leggomylibro 7y ago
PICs are also very low-power and low-cost. They still have a bit of a niche in the world of modern microcontrollers, unlike some popular 8-bit MCUs that I could name...
segfaultbuserr 7y ago
Most are circuit configurations, the code is generic, this is why the title I used to submit it was "PIC Microcontroller Circuits", not Microcontroller. Usually the original title should always be used to discourage clickbaits, however, in cases like this example, I think it's justified to add relevant context. Unfortunately, the moderators overcorrected it and removed circuits.

amelius 7y ago

Anybody succeeded in using open source tools to program PIC microcontrollers? Is it easy to create a USB (slave) interface through this route?

nitrogen 7y ago
I created a USB IR transmitter using a PIC microcontroller, but the pure-assembly USB stack I used was created by a professor at a school I don't recall and had no license agreement, so I did not open source it. I used the assembler from gputils, a PICKit for initial flashing (before all of my hardware was stolen), and there was a bootloader so most of the time flashing occurred over USB.
Zardoz84 7y ago
There is a Arduino clone using PICs. Pingüino Is called. all open source. I made one using the older not PIC32 version and worked very fine.

analog31 7y ago

The 8-bit PIC microcontrollers won the love of hobbyists for a number of good reasons. In particular, the PIC16C84 and PIC16F84 chips had EEPROM/Flash memory that eliminated the need for an ultraviolet erasure stage. They were available in DIP packages that were easily handled. The documentation and programming tools (just an assembler at first) were approachable. The input/output pins were fairly robust, so the chips were hard to kill. The power supply voltage range was forgiving, and allowed for easy operation from batteries. The 8-bit PIC architecture lacked some features that frustrated writing a proper C compiler for the chips. But that wasn't a problem if you moved up to the 16- and 32-bit processors, which also had some lovely peripherals such as a 12-bit A to D converter. I programmed my first PIC16C84 chip using a programming circuit that I built myself through the parallel printer port of my MS-DOS computer, using a program that I wrote in Turbo Pascal. I was hooked. Those were the days. Since then I've moved on to chips and boards that can be programmed using the Arduino tool chain.

bsder 7y ago
You forgot "Ran a BASIC interpreter". 8-bit PIC's were used a LOT for "glue" tasks. Sequencing powerup, initializing complex chips, period status reporting (like battery voltage), etc. I have seen quite a lot of really complex, expensive boards with a tiny PIC hidden somewhere away on the board to control it all. The 8-bit PIC's were also a quick way to slap a UART on a board that you could use to query all the things on your board. Finally, the PIC18 series were actually innovative in many ways for the time. For example, they had USB and Ethernet interfaces in cheap chips long before anybody else did.
zokier 7y ago
> The 8-bit PIC microcontrollers won the love of hobbyists for a number of good reasons. And I'd argue lost it with lack of open source compiler support. > But that wasn't a problem if you moved up to the 16- and 32-bit processors Microchip is selling XC licenses ($1500 and needs a dongle) for 16 bit PICs, because there is still no gcc/clang available. This in a universe where msp430, avr, and arm (and many others) all have good upstreamed gcc support. So I say it's still a problem. 32-bit PICs are just MIPS cores so they have at least some degree of support via that.