🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <71044@microsoft.UUCP+ jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK) writes:
+In article <4200@lupine.NCD.COM> rfg@NCD.COM (Ron Guilmette) writes:
+|Hummm... I'll bet you would like to see the data object called `array' in
+|the following example be able to go into ROM.  Interestingly, I think
+|that the semantics currently defined for the initialization of local
+|static objects might effectively prohibit such treatment.
+|
+|	void foobar ()
+|	{
+|		static const char array[] = "Hello world.\n";
+|
+|		// ...
+|	}
+|
+|This is probably not the best example I could have cooked up, but if you
+|read the bottom half of page 92 in the ARM, you may see the problem that
+|I'm getting at.
+
+I'm not sure I do.  I don't see any problems with you example.  
+Perhaps you can clarify?...

Well, perhaps my idle theorizing about how to ROM-ize a C++ program
is a bit half-baked, but here goes...

One possible approach to ROM-izing a C++ program would be to actually
*run* the program until just before it is about to enter main() and
then freeze the image of all of the code and all of the initialized
(and const) file-scope objects at that instant in time and then burn
the PROMS based upon that image.

That way, if you had some class C (which required construction) and
some file-scope object declaration like:

	const C c_object (9.9, "hello world");

The "initial" values for these could go into ROM also.

Unfortunately, this scheme leaves out the example from my previous
posting (shown above).  Try to imagine the declaration of `array'
being something like this instead:

	static const C local_c_object (9.9 "hello");

This will not have been "elaborated" at the "image freeze time" so
you won't be able to put this particular object into ROM.

-- 

// Ron Guilmette  -  C++ Entomologist
// Internet: rfg@ncd.com      uucp: ...uunet!lupine!rfg
// New motto:  If it ain't broke, try using a bigger hammer.