Amt

That makes a lot of sense, actually! I suppose the only advantage for the 805 parts is with marking their presence in the layout. At the moment, I just solder them on the final board without mentioning anywhere. On the actual board, there is some space savings because the SMT part can be inserted between the 2.54x2.54 mm grid. I'll try to help you add them and push the changes back. Let me see how the footprints are encoded.

That makes a lot of sense, actually! I suppose the only advantage for the 805 parts is with marking their presence in the layout. At the moment, I just solder them on the final board without mentioning anywhere. I'll try to help you add them and push the changes back. Let me see how the footprints are encoded.

I like how currently SOIC chips can be added into VeroRoute. Are there any plans to add support for more of the simple SMT footprints? (TSSOP, QFP, 0805, SMA etc). This would make the tool even more useful. Thanks in advance!

I tried to port it but it seems to use configs/code from both K42 and non-K42 sections and PPS settings are new. This chip has enough memory AFAIK for FF.

Chaning the stringlength to 37 from 38 resolved the issue! Ah, I see so the PICTYPE could arbitarily have a length of 10 or 11 depending on the chip and this causes the VER to mismatch and cause this issue, makes sense. I wonder if a macro could solve this issue.

Hi, Looks like the 2.40 version of PIC-AS aslo has this issue. Just tried rebuilding with it. Is there some way to detect these RJMPs ? It's funny how it worked well in some old version. XC8 is progressing backwards ! off-topic : Is there any benefit / issue with enabling the extended instruction set?

I flashed FF onto a PIC18F4520 today using AS from mplabX 6. Forth works on it but the warm word doesn't seem to do anything. Could you guide me on what might be wrong Several months ago I had flashed the same chip with an older version of FF using mplab 8 and that didn't have this issue. This is the output of warm ok<#,ram> ok<#,ram> warm & ok<#,ram> ok<#,ram> warm &

Thanks! will experiment with this soon. I'm trying to standardize on a one PIC device so got curious about a few things: What aspects of the K42 and Q41 series affect FF operations? I noticed a difference in the flash erase size. Other than not having EEPROM, shouldn't any PIC18 with flash > 8KB work ? What pic18 chips work best for FF? and I'm curious why. How about pic24 vs pic18 when it comes to FF? which one is better supported? or are there any caveats ?