From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_05 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 19 Sep 92 02:28:28 GMT
From: seas.gwu.edu!mfeldman@uunet.uu.net  (Michael Feldman)
Subject: Re: Using Global Variables
Message-ID: <1992Sep19.022828.11648@seas.gwu.edu>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <1992Sep18.235238.25207@nosc.mil> sampson@nosc.mil (Charles H. Samps
on) writes:

[stuff deleted]

>So, my question now is: For those real-time systems for which global vari-
>ables are used instead of expensive parameter passage, was that decision
>based on inherent limitations of the hardware, lack of cleverness by the
>compiler writers, or poor analysis of the actual costs of parameter pas-
>sage?
>
In my very limited experience working with real-world real-time people,
it's been mostly the last. There's a lot of folklore in real-time systems.
One of the bits of folk wisdom is "parameters are expensive; globals
are cheap." It's easier to just rely on the folk wisdom than to actually
analyze or measure.

Two bits of _my_ folk wisdom:

(1) Fast enough is fast enough. Tweak (only) what you need to tweak.

(2) It's easier to make a correct program fast than to make a fast program
    correct.

Mike Feldman