From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f5d71,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: f849b,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gidf849b,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 101b33,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid101b33,public X-Google-Thread: 146b77,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid146b77,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 115aec,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public From: Wolfgang Denk Subject: Re: Ada vs C++ vs Java Date: 1999/01/15 Message-ID: <77mu1h$n6m$1@galaxy.mchh.siemens.de>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 432879486 References: <369C1F31.AE5AF7EF@concentric.net> <369DDDC3.FDE09999@sea.ericsson.se> <369e309a.32671759@news.demon.co.uk> Organization: Siemens AG,(Hofmannstr) Munich-Germany-Europe. Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.vxworks,comp.lang.java,comp.java.advocacy,comp.realtime,comp.arch.embedded,comp.object,comp.lang.java.programmer Date: 1999-01-15T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: johnb@invision.co.uk (John Birch) writes: >There are many embedded programmers who regard the concept of dynamic >memory allocation in an embedded system as laughable at best and a >terminal offence at worst. If you restict C++ in such a way (i.e. I think you are on very thin ice here. First, I gues you really were thinking of "hard realtime require- ments", which is a somewhat different issue. Many embedded systems don't have realtime problems (but of course there are many others that do). But even under hard realtime you certainly will very often use dynamic memory allocation - all variables put on the stack are using a method of "dynamic memory allocation", aren't they? And even malloc() has it's use here and there, especially when you do it only once during initialization/configuration... Wolfgang Denk -- Office: (+49)-89-722-27328, Fax -36703 Wolfgang.Denk@icn.siemens.de Private: (+49)-89-95720-110, Fax -112 wd@denx.muc.de Another dream that failed. There's nothing sadder. -- Kirk, "This side of Paradise", stardate 3417.3