Article View: gnu.g++.help
Article #949Re: OO & C++ vs C & Realtime
From: Emil Rojas
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 1997 00:00
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 1997 00:00
131 lines
5636 bytes
5636 bytes
--------------9871A9DC3C94625AE21AE73B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit hanasaki wrote: > 1) > I am looking for a comparison of C vs C++ in terms of features and > performance. > > 2) > I am looking for anything that shows C++ and/or OO is viable for > realtime systems. Success stories ect... The best would be a OO > argument followed by C++ is viable for Realtime OO. > > I am under a tight time constraint. Please email responses directly > to me. > This kind of questions illustrates I think an interesting cunundrum. The question itself suggests that the questioner does not have enough experience with object oriented principles to be jumping into C++ on a tight schedule. (Hanasaki, please forgive me if this is incorrect, I do realize that there may be other reasons than ignorance for you asking this question.) C++ is a complex language I would not recommend any one on a very tight schedule learn C++ and use it on an embedded system project at the same time, unless that 1) they have a strong embedded system background, and 2) they were comfortable with obect techniques. Or rather, I would recommend that you use C++ only as a better C in this circumstance. On the other hand, it is clearly the case that C++ is appropriate to almost every embedded project given that the programmers understand what they are doing. I have seen, and I sure others have seen more than I, cases of PC based uses of C++ that would be a disaster on an embedded target. BTW, C++ was created with embedded applications in mind, and I believe some of its earliest applications were to embedded telephone switching systems. I guess what I would really recomend (and this is self serving:-) that anyone that feels that this is an appropriate question: that yes they should use C++ and that they go out find a consultant that can show them how to use C++ rather try to go it alone. emil -- emil rojas -- software consultant emil@lapel.com; www.lapel.com Lapel Software 20 South Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 301 Los Gatos, CA 95030 (408) 354-4648 --------------9871A9DC3C94625AE21AE73B Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <HTML> hanasaki wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>1) <BR>I am looking for a comparison of C vs C++ in terms of features and performance. <P>2) <BR>I am looking for anything that shows C++ and/or OO is viable for realtime systems. Success stories ect... The best would be a OO argument followed by C++ is viable for Realtime OO. <P>I am under a tight time constraint. Please email responses directly to me. <BR> </BLOCKQUOTE> This kind of questions illustrates I think an interesting cunundrum. <P>The question itself suggests that the questioner does not have enough <BR>experience with object oriented principles to be jumping into C++ <BR>on a tight schedule. (Hanasaki, please forgive me if this is incorrect, <BR>I do realize that there may be other reasons than ignorance for you asking this <BR>question.) C++ is a complex language I would not recommend any <BR>one on a very tight schedule learn C++ and use it on an embedded <BR>system project at the same time, unless that 1) they have a strong embedded <BR>system background, and 2) they were comfortable with obect techniques. <BR>Or rather, I would recommend that you use C++ <U>only</U> as a better C in this <BR>circumstance. <P>On the other hand, it is clearly the case that C++ is appropriate to almost <BR>every embedded project given that the programmers understand what <BR>they are doing. I have seen, and I sure others have seen more than I, cases <BR>of PC based uses of C++ that would be a disaster on an embedded target. <P>BTW, C++ was created with embedded applications in mind, and I believe <BR>some of its earliest applications were to embedded telephone switching <BR>systems. <P>I guess what I would really recomend (and this is self serving:-) that anyone <BR>that feels that this is an appropriate question: that yes they should use C++ <BR>and that they go out find a consultant that can show them how to use C++ <BR>rather try to go it alone. <P>emil <P>-- <BR>emil rojas -- software consultant <BR>emil@lapel.com; www.lapel.com <BR>Lapel Software <BR>20 South Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 301 <BR>Los Gatos, CA 95030 (408) 354-4648 <BR> </HTML> --------------9871A9DC3C94625AE21AE73B--
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<349E8B67.26C696C6@lapel.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<349A9451.1238D59F@microlink.net>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10ba33,9d774527184554ac X-Google-Attributes: gid10ba33,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,9d774527184554ac X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,9d774527184554ac X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 115aec,9d774527184554ac X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public X-Google-Thread: fcb4e,9d774527184554ac X-Google-Attributes: gidfcb4e,public X-Google-Thread: 10a47d,9d774527184554ac X-Google-Attributes: gid10a47d,public From: Emil Rojas <emil@lapel.com> Subject: Re: OO & C++ vs C & Realtime Date: 1997/12/22 Message-ID: <349E8B67.26C696C6@lapel.com> X-Deja-AN: 309352169 References: <349A9451.1238D59F@microlink.net> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: emil-NO_SPAM_PLEASE@lapel.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------9871A9DC3C94625AE21AE73B" X-Trace: 882805675 18833 (none) 206.86.0.12 Organization: Lapel Software Newsgroups: gnu.g++.help,comp.software-eng,comp.object,comp.realtime,bnr.software-eng,comp.software.measurement