On Thursday, February 27, 2003 8:52:03 PM UTC-5, vasanta wrote:
> What is the disadvantage with C++ in Embedded systems?. Why C is
> preferred than C++ in embedded systems?. Thanks in advance for help,
> appreciated.
Suppose you had a car with a lever that could switch it into 4-wheel drive.Your question is analogous to asking if you should remove the lever, so it would always run in 2-wheel drive.
A C99 program can be compiled with a C++ compiler with, at most, minor modifications. If there is any significant performance difference, that means the C++ compiler needs improving. It's not a consequence of differences inthe languages.
If you use C++-specific features (not in C), there are performance implications. Just as there are performance implications to using 4-wheel drive instead of 2-wheel drive. Here is something I wrote that delves into that issue somewhat:
http://wkaras.webs.com/Cpp_overhead.html
A "managerial" argument that one hears is that, few programmers are carefulenough to make good decision about when and how to use C++ features. I think in some niches that may be applicable. Thing is, dynamic allocation ofresources is pretty common in code bases. So now you're looking for programmers who are thoughtful enough to do dynamic allocation WITHOUT all the C++ features for error-proofing dynamic allocation, yet not able or willing to use C++ effectively.
> What is the disadvantage with C++ in Embedded systems?. Why C is
> preferred than C++ in embedded systems?. Thanks in advance for help,
> appreciated.
Suppose you had a car with a lever that could switch it into 4-wheel drive.Your question is analogous to asking if you should remove the lever, so it would always run in 2-wheel drive.
A C99 program can be compiled with a C++ compiler with, at most, minor modifications. If there is any significant performance difference, that means the C++ compiler needs improving. It's not a consequence of differences inthe languages.
If you use C++-specific features (not in C), there are performance implications. Just as there are performance implications to using 4-wheel drive instead of 2-wheel drive. Here is something I wrote that delves into that issue somewhat:
http://wkaras.webs.com/Cpp_overhead.html
A "managerial" argument that one hears is that, few programmers are carefulenough to make good decision about when and how to use C++ features. I think in some niches that may be applicable. Thing is, dynamic allocation ofresources is pretty common in code bases. So now you're looking for programmers who are thoughtful enough to do dynamic allocation WITHOUT all the C++ features for error-proofing dynamic allocation, yet not able or willing to use C++ effectively.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire