>>>>> "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