SLAAEQ6 March   2025 MSPM0G3519

 

  1.   1
  2.   Abstract
  3.   Trademarks
  4. 1Introduction
  5. 2Pre-Migration Preparation
    1. 2.1 CCS Version Comparison
    2. 2.2 Pre-Migration Preparation
  6. 3Porting Code to CCS
    1. 3.1 Prepare for Porting
    2. 3.2 Set Up CCS Environment
    3. 3.3 Import Source Code and Files in CCS
    4. 3.4 Handle Device-Specific Code
    5. 3.5 Adapt Code for CCS
    6. 3.6 Build and Debug
  7. 4Post-Migration Optimization
  8. 5Summary
  9. 6References

2.1 CCS Version Comparison

During the preparation of this document, Texas Instruments released Code Composer Studio™ (CCS) v20, a significant architectural overhaul transitioning from the legacy Eclipse-based framework to the modern Theia IDE platform. While this update introduces enhanced toolchain integration and a streamlined user interface, the technical analysis and methodologies presented herein remain primarily grounded in CCS v12.8 and earlier iterations. The migration to CCS v20 has minimal bearing on the core content of this article; however, to make sure of clarity for readers utilizing the latest environment, TI provide a concise comparison of critical differences between v12.8 and v20 in the following section.

Table 2-1 Comparison between CCS v20 and CCS v12.8
CCS v12.8 and Earlier CCS v20
Architecture Eclipse Rich Client Platform Eclipse Theia
Strengths Mature and stable, good for deeply customizable plugins and toolchains in embedded development. Modern architecture supporting cloud or desktop hybrid workflows, native compatibility with VS Code extensions, and seamless DevOps integration.
Weaknesses Relies on legacy technology, limited support for modern web standards, and higher memory and resource usage. Smaller community ecosystem compared to Eclipse; some advanced plugins require third-party adaptation.
User Experience Classic multi-window layout with nested menus and a steep learning curve. VS Code-like interface with drag-and-drop panel customization (for example, terminal, memory views).