>>On 5/27/05, Bill Sconce wrote:
> If it were me I'd go with C++. C++ allows better commenting.
One concern is setting (and clearing) the microprocessor's interrupt
mask in C++. The code contains processes should not be interrupted
during a critical step. Some compilers are strict (or poo
Jim Kuzdrall writes:
> C++ versus C is my quandary. Can anyone give me good reasons for
> choosing one over the other in this case. Opinions are welcome, but I
> must have a list of reasons ready if my choice is questioned.
Pros for C++:
o easier to work with in a OOD/OOP way
o STL
On Fri, 27 May 2005 16:46:20 -0400
Paul Lussier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FWIW, I'd go with C, just because there's at least some
> standardization for C and therefore, among compilers, whereas there
> isn't with C++, which would allow for somewhat better potability if
> that's important.
Pot
On Friday 27 May 2005 4:46 pm, Paul Lussier wrote:
> Jerry Feldman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > As far as performance, C generally gives you better performance. but C
> > programmers tend to be skimpy with comments and tend to write tricky
> > code.
>
> That seems to be a "feature" of any given
Jerry Feldman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As far as performance, C generally gives you better performance. but C
> programmers tend to be skimpy with comments and tend to write tricky code.
That seems to be a "feature" of any given programmer. Since Jim is
going to be the programmer regardle
On Fri, 27 May 2005 14:55:58 -0400
Jeff Macdonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/27/05, Bill Sconce wrote:
> > If it were me I'd go with C++. C++ allows better commenting.
>
> How so?
Because of the // form. You guessed the purpose of my joke correctly.
But your command string was buggy.
On Friday 27 May 2005 2:55 pm, Jeff Macdonald wrote:
> On 5/27/05, Bill Sconce wrote:
> > If it were me I'd go with C++. C++ allows better commenting.
>
> How so?
I agree with Bill in his initial statement that C++ is probably the better
way to go, but I may disagree that it allows for better com
On 5/27/05, Bill Sconce wrote:
> If it were me I'd go with C++. C++ allows better commenting.
How so?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mda]$ gcc -Wall -o hello foo.c
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mda]$ cat foo.c
#include
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
printf("hello world\n");
// std beginner program
return(0);
On Fri, 27 May 2005 11:48:52 -0400
Jim Kuzdrall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The stipulations were: 1) use Linux; 2) use C++.
If it were me I'd go with C++. C++ allows better commenting.
Besides, and seriously, the better business decision as embodied
in going with the client's stipulatio
On May 27, 2005, at 11:48, Jim Kuzdrall wrote:
The stipulations were: 1) use Linux; 2) use C++.
Sounds like they want well-debugged code. 99.99 % of the time the STL
classes are better than ones you'd write on a 1-off basis, both in
terms of being debugged and in terms of performance.
If it were me I'd pick a candidate DSP and then go
and find mailing lists and USENET newsgroups oriented
around that processor where folks are discussing projects
similar to mine. I might end up learning that C or C++
support is better or worse than expected, or which of
the available execs is b
On Friday 27 May 2005 11:48 am, Jim Kuzdrall wrote:
> C++ versus C is my quandary. Can anyone give me good reasons for
> choosing one over the other in this case. Opinions are welcome, but I
> must have a list of reasons ready if my choice is questioned.
Very quickly, C++ might be a better c
On Friday, May 27th 2005 at 11:48 -0400, quoth Jim Kuzdrall:
=>Greetings All,
=>
=>A military client arbitrarily added 2 contract requirements which I
=>have the opportunity to change. I need some advice from your
=>collective experience to make certain I don't regret my choice a year
=>fr
Greetings All,
A military client arbitrarily added 2 contract requirements which I
have the opportunity to change. I need some advice from your
collective experience to make certain I don't regret my choice a year
from now.
The stipulations were: 1) use Linux; 2) use C++.
The sys
14 matches
Mail list logo
