>>>>> "Marcin" == Marcin Dalecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcin> On 2005-04-15, at 20:18, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Thursday, April 14, 2005, at 08:48 PM, Marcin Dalecki wrote:
>>> Templates are a no-go for a well known and well defined subset
>>> for C++ for embedded programming known commonly as well embedded
>>> C++.
>> My god, you didn't actually buy into that did you? Hint, it was
>> is, and always will be a joke.
Marcin> You dare to explain what's so funny about it?
The fact that many of the C++ features omitted from "embedded C++" are
perfectly valid and useful for embedded systems programming, and cause
neither space nor speed problems in the hands of reasonably competent
programmers.
I looked at it once, prompted by a question from engineering
management here. It was immediately obvious that many of the feature
deletions were driven by language religion (e.g., design choices made
differently in some other object-oriented languages) and had no
factual basis in performance or code size. Either that, or the
choices were based on the assumption that cfront is a state of the art
C++ compiler. So we decided to ignore "embedded C++" as irrelevant.
Our subsequent system implementation experience confirmed the validity
of this analysis.
paul
