> Will Andrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Well, Warner, I've never done embedded systems.  So, tell me, do they
> > actually use any C++ code in embedded systems?  C++ has a rather high
> > overhead as far as disk space & memory goes.
> That's a myth.
> >                                               I would imagine that 99%+
> > of embedded systems do not use C++ code except perhaps for a very small
> > amount of the code.
> >From experience, I would imagine the reverse.

OK, I'll pipe up.

1.  I can't agree with you about the reverse, that 99% is C++ and 1% C,
much more can and should be done in C++, and

2.  When you know what you're doing there is no additional overhead in
time and space using C++ versus C.  Also, you won't be screwing around
creating large amounts of messy "class code" housekeeping in C.  I think
the kernel could benefit from restricted C++ support.  However,

3.  Far too many people don't know at all what they're doing.  One of
the first things I noticed on a recent project was I couldn't compile
and run it in simulation without running out of swap because objects
representing the system memory map were being accidentally created but
not referenced.  C is much more forgiving of ignorance.


Peter Dufault ([EMAIL PROTECTED])   Realtime development, Machine control,
HD Associates, Inc.               Fail-Safe systems, Agency approval

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to