CC5x Vs XC8 ( latest versions )

[alien]

Dear all ,
Have anyone here made an effort to compare between these two C compilers (latest versions) as mentioned in the subject line above (CC5x Vs XC8). As per my experience CC5x is the best c compiler (with a little extra learning curve) in terms of " Code optimisation " BUT at the same time CC5x supports limited complexity statements / expressions , one can not make complex single line statements/expressions in CC5x but will have to spit a complex statement/expression into few smaller simple statements (and may require some extra temporary variables) on the other hand C compilers like XC8 can support a good level of single line complex C statements BUT with optimisation levels which are far lower than CC5x .
Also there seems to be not much interest in CC5x here in our beloved forum but on the other hand we have full fledge forum "pinned" threads on XC8 and several other C compilers . I think CC5x too deserves its space here  .

[pickit2]

Looking at the pinned topics CC5x is pinned.

[alien]

Am I missing something  ?

[pickit2]

Sorry I misread that as CCS 5x, but then if you search for CC5x there is only one post.
so ask the mod O2 to Pin it. but I see no reason to pin it.

[alien]

but then if you search for CC5x there is only one post.

This is the exact reason why I started this thread , as I can remember there was some work done on CC5x few years ago  by one forum member " KCSOFT " and thereafter no one came up with any solution for CC5x . I believe that once someone do some serious work using CC5x and gets the feeling of versatility and efficiency this wonderful compiler offers then one will never look back at any other  C compilers  (except situations where some fancy readymade stuff like inbuilt libraries / wrapper functions etc are required  ) .

[pickit2]

if members wanted CC5x then it would be an active topic.  but I don't think it will ever get a sticky tab.

[sam_des]

This is the exact reason why I started this thread , as I can remember there was some work done on CC5x few years ago  by one forum member " KCSOFT " and thereafter no one came up with any solution for CC5x . I believe that once someone do some serious work using CC5x and gets the feeling of versatility and efficiency this wonderful compiler offers then one will never look back at any other  C compilers  (except situations where some fancy readymade stuff like inbuilt libraries / wrapper functions etc are required  )

After using the RED edition by KCSOFT, I switched to CC5X completely. In fact I still have active licenses of both CC5X & CC8E, even though over the years I have switched to ARM.
Its indeed a fantastic compiler once you get used to its quirks & not being ANSI compliant. Its stable, produces reliable code & its optimizations are better than even xc8 & far better than CCS.
But you've to be aware of underlying architecture to take advantage of them. Of course lack of ready-made peripheral libraries pushes it down the user list.

BTW, for anyone interested, license costs are way lower than other compilers & You get considerable discounts if you purchase multiple licenses simultaneously.

sam_des

[Wilksey]

Is the "Test" version the full version?  Does anyone have a working copy, all links are dead in the original thread, would be interested to see what it does compared to XC8.

[alien]

Is the "Test" version the full version?  Does anyone have a working copy, all links are dead in the original thread, would be interested to see what it does compared to XC8.

Yes the "Test version" is the full extended version with restriction which renders this as totally non productive for actual "production" . The ASM files labels generated are replaced with fixed text instead of the actual label names .Please refer attached image ..
 

[tomywong]

Is the "Test" version the full version?  Does anyone have a working copy, all links are dead in the original thread, would be interested to see what it does compared to XC8.

I've the red version if you need ? I will try to find it from my old HD. (It is very old v3.2N, but is full version)

[Wilksey]

Hi tommywong, yes please, just want to try it not too worried if it is a bit outdated, the latest is only 3.8 I think

[alien]

Hi tommywong, yes please, just want to try it not too worried if it is a bit outdated, the latest is only 3.8 I think

I am very much sure that even though that is very old version BUT you will be surprised to see that "old version" will still beat the latest XC8 in code speed/optimisation hands down (although I have never used this XC8 stuff but this is my gut feeling (after having observed for long on how CC5x compiles/generates the code ))    .I would advice to read the compiler manual cover to cover many times ,then only you will be able to squeeze out the maximum juice out of CC5x .

[Wilksey]

alien, are you comparing it against XC8 pro or XC8 free?
It also depends on how well it does compiling the code, I think I saw something that said it wasn't fully compliant, so we'll see.

[alien]

alien, are you comparing it against XC8 pro or XC8 free?

XC8 pro hopefully

It also depends on how well it does compiling the code, I think I saw something that said it wasn't fully compliant, so we'll see.

Yes as this is non ANSI compliant ( that's ok and acceptable on a weird architecture like Microchip Midrange  )

[tomywong]

Hi tommywong, yes please, just want to try it not too worried if it is a bit outdated, the latest is only 3.8 I think

Here it is. At the moment, I still using it. It compile the source to smallest hex file. Very good !

CC5X Test Edition don't generate hex file, instead it generate asm source file. But, because the labels not complete. You can not assemble the source file. Long time ago, KCSOFT cracked it. But I lose the file.

[Wilksey]

Oh does it not contain the patch?

Posted on: August 31, 2022, 01:39:37 13:39 - Automerged
This version doesn't generate ASM but does generate HEX?

[tomywong]

Oh does it not contain the patch?

No, the red version is something like full version. No need to patch.

Posted on: August 31, 2022, 01:39:37 13:39 - Automerged

This version doesn't generate ASM but does generate HEX?

For red version, you can try from command line : cc5x -L sample1.c
It will generate lst, hex and occ files.

For v3.8 test version, try : cc5x -L sample1.c
it will generate asm, lst, occ files.

You can compare the lst file from red version and asm file from v3.8 test version.
All label will be M000, so, it can not compile.

[Wilksey]

Oh I see, so the latest 3.8 CAN output hex?

[tomywong]

Oh I see, so the latest 3.8 CAN output hex?

Sorry, my mistake, v3.8 test version can not generate hex file.
v3.8 free version can generate hex but it is not full optimization.

[Wilksey]

Do you have the original 3.2N package?

[tomywong]

Do you have the original 3.2N package?

No, sorry. Maybe you can ask user KCSOFT for orginal/cracked test version.

[Wilksey]

No, sorry. Maybe you can ask user KCSOFT for orginal/cracked test version.

Nice idea but they were last active 2016, so I doubt i'll get a reply!
Do you know what the "RED" edition is?  Is it the "test" version patched for outputting hex and incrementing the labels or have they changed the test version to disable HEX output on the later revisions?

[sam_des]

Hi,

CC5X Editions:

• Free : 32k Flash Supported, But some/all optimizations disabled, No Support for 24/32-BIT integer, 16/32-BIT Floating Point, 16/24/32-BIT Fixed Point, Limited support for Enhanced Core, Generates final HEX & all other files.
• Test: Everything supported as per Standard License, No HEX file generated, ASM file generated but can't be assembled to generate HEX file.
  
• RED: Everything supported as per Standard License except,only up to 8k Flash, only 16-BIT integer & 24-BIT Floating Point math supported. Most optimizations are available & generates final HEX file. No support for Enhanced Core as its quite old from 2006.
  

This 3.2N RED edition might be was for some special edition for some particular client or released as demo with limits, but its official as per documentation & EXE file clearly indicates.
Also RED is not available publicly from CC5X website which offers only STANDARD & EXTENDED licenses.

Hope this helps.
sam_des

[Wilksey]

sam_des thanks, so no hope of getting a later RED version in that case?  It says when you obtain a license they give you a txt file, but I presume they also send you a "full" exe?

[sam_des]

so no hope of getting a later RED version in that case?

Most Probably no.

It says when you obtain a license they give you a txt file, but I presume they also send you a "full" exe

Yes. EXE for Licensed Setup is different from Free/Test edition setups.

sam_des