> -----Original Message----- > From: openocd-development-boun...@lists.berlios.de [mailto:openocd- > development-boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Michel Catudal > Sent: donderdag 10 december 2009 0:59 > To: Freddie Chopin > Cc: openocd-development > Subject: Re: [Openocd-development] New object-orientated C++ architecture > for OpenOCD? > > Freddie Chopin a écrit : > > Why everyone sees only the bad sides of C++ and completely forgets the > > good ones? Templates? Stronger compilation-time-error-checks? Easier > > error handling? Easier abstraction? Easier polymorphism? Easier - well - > > everything? > > > > > I will never use C++ in my embedded projects until the cost of memory is > almost zero.. > Joke aside, I can't see how C++ can be better than C in an embedded system.
Its a trade-off between the number of units you can sell and the length of the development cycle. C++ comes with a bunch of libraries that make programming easier and less prone to bugs (STL libraries, string type, etc). You could end up with a shorter development cycle and a more robust product. Most of our products (even the little critters without OS) communicate over tcp/ip. Projects tend to get larger and larger because more functionality is required. I estimate about 5% of the C code I write has to do with range and buffer size checking. If a library can take care of the range checking stuff, that would make code more readable. Microsoft is even pushing C# into small OS-less embedded systems (dotnet micro framework). Nico Coesel _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
