Anybody using PIC32 and Harmony? Successfully?

Select option -> Generate Code -> Build -> Build fails. Select different option -> Generate Code -> Build -> Build fails. Try yet another option -> Generate Code -> Build -> Build fails.

Harmony is a giant framework where you select from hundreds of options (drivers, TCP stack, etc), then generate your application's frame. It favors a monster-loop state machine, at a point where the application complexity (something needing PIC32 with 2MB flash and 512kb RAM) makes this a loosing proposition. RTOS options were pasted on later and appear to be 2nd class citizens. Its a bit different than just pulling the drivers you need from a vendor-provided library. And it seems to generate a frame that doesn't build (for anything I've tried).

Is anyone using this successfully? We were asked to quote a job using a newer PIC32MZ, though some of the chip's attractive features have bugs making them potentially useless for the customer application (like the crypto block).

Thanks! Best Regards, Dave

Reply to
Dave Nadler
Loading thread data ...

I've been sticking to an older version of MPLAB X specifically to avoid usi ng Harmony. For the most part we've been using PIC32MX chips and I've had a good experience with the deprecated PLIB functions, been able to do everyt hing I need with those. I think we had a project that was looking at an MZ part and noticed that th e pre-Harmony versions of MPLAB did not support those, if I remember correc tly.

I once did the initial bring-up of one board and the layout of another, eac h with the same PIC32MX on board, and passed them both to a colleague who a ctually chose to work with Harmony and apparently didn't have any issue. I tried installing a newer MPLAB and Harmony just to give it a try for the sa ke of getting up to date and getting more uniformity with what my colleague s are doing, but I took a short look at it and went back to the old MPLAB X .

Reply to

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.