I have always thought that the 'hidden overhead' argument against C++ in 
embedded systems was a bit specious.

For example, given the two C statements:

a += b;
a /= b;

The second has a lot more 'hidden overhead' than the first on many, many 
architectures. Of course, anybody writing in C for a small system knows, 
more or less instinctively, that division is more expensive than addition.

Well, I submit that an _experienced_, _knowledgeable_, C++ programmer has a 
similar understanding of the overheads involved in C++ (things like virtual 
functions and exceptions).

I have built some very large embedded systems (x86 based as it happens) in 
C++. These are developed/maintained by several programmers of different 
skill levels over a period of literally a decade, and I have never seen a 
'hidden overhead' get in the way of good performance.

A reductio ad absurdium argument on the 'hidden overhead' point would have 
us all writing in assembly (which I rather like, but...).

-- Bob Ammerman
RAm Systems


-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist