The downloaded User guide does not follow the same menus as the v5.35

MPLAB user guide resides in C:\Program Files (x86)\Microchip\MPLABX\v5.35\docs folder, i don't know how often they upgrade this manual.

 

Too bad the examples shown are only in C !

I have a feeling it is because as you go up in flash memory space needed for more advanced applications it would just take too long to do it all in asm. I remember back when i had a TRS80 i did all kinds of stuff in assembler it was actually fun. That was really for low level programming though like altering the disk drive system to update to more advanced date and time storage and stuff like that. I did a lot of real human type apps in Basic and Pascal. For example a checking account program would take ages to program in assembler if it was to be any good.
After i moved to a Windows machine i had to use a higher level language for everything except some low level .dll function calls and stuff like that where the language didnt cover those cases, but trying to do everything i do today in assembler (not included the microcontrollers) would just never happen. For one, i use a Windows API where all the function calls are C like functions and you have to be able to link to those functions and use them effectively. That really requires C or C++ or a langauge that can link to .dll libraries. Talking about libraries, the ones already written have to be used from a C type language. Yes it can be done in asm, but it would be a huge task to handle the calls and the returns and actually using it for stuff like graphics programs.
That doesnt mean that i dont still have to be aware of some lower level stuff though, like where in memory some things are stored, but it's only possible to do those programs in a higher level language.

I like using asm for the mid range PIC chips but from what i read Microchip may be making things simpler for programmers with that thing they call Code Configuration thing that seems to write some code for things like ADC access and EEPROMs and other stuff.
Also, it seems that you can still set different things almost the same way as in asm like the i/o port pins.

I did notice that when i went to the Arduino i was doing things a lot faster using C or C++. It's not only the language, it's the pre-existing libraries that would be hard to use in asm i think. Using C with a PIC chip might be similar now just different libraries or similar code. I do feel i would lose some touch with the hardware though, but maybe the compensation is faster program code turnaround. Get the apps up and running faster. I also have to wonder how fast the program flash memory would be filled using C instead of asm with a chip that only has 1k of flash memory.

I guess i'll find out at some point.

I see they sell Pickit3 programmers with zero insertion force IC sockets now as a set, so you can use the socket and the programmer and start programming a chip without having the PC board built yet. That's interesting as i do that sometimes just to see how the code is going to work out first.