Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList
Thread
'[OT] RIP Dennis Ritchie'
2011\10\13@195158
by
Bob Blick
2011\10\13@213126
by
IVP
2011\10\13@220706
by
Yigit Turgut
2011\10\14@170041
by
Barry Gershenfeld
On other forums, the guys are reminiscing about the good old days when they
used to use C. I guess that makes us special, those of us who use it
currently
2011\10\15@010654
by
Sean Breheny
Are those other forums related to programming for embedded systems or
more application development? My experience is that C is very much
alive and well in the embedded realm but much less common now in the
application development field.
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Barry Gershenfeld <.....gbarry42KILLspam
@spam@gmail.com> wrote:
> On other forums, the guys are reminiscing about the good old days when they
> used to use C. I guess that makes us special, those of us who use it
> currently.
>
2011\10\15@040902
by
Chris McSweeny
Personally I tend to use C++ even for embedded stuff in a professional
capacity nowadays - though I'm generally talking about more complex
processors than PICs in that case. Or were you suggesting the use of
something not related to C at all (which is in reality unlikely -
languages like Java surely owe a lot to C)?
Chris
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 6:06 AM, Sean Breheny <shb7
KILLspamcornell.edu> wrote:
> Are those other forums related to programming for embedded systems or
> more application development? My experience is that C is very much
> alive and well in the embedded realm but much less common now in the
> application development field.
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Barry Gershenfeld <.....gbarry42KILLspam
.....gmail.com> wrote:
>> On other forums, the guys are reminiscing about the good old days when they
>> used to use C. I guess that makes us special, those of us who use it
>> currently.
>> -
2011\10\15@074019
by
M.L.
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 1:06 AM, Sean Breheny <EraseMEshb7spam_OUT
TakeThisOuTcornell.edu> wrote:
> Are those other forums related to programming for embedded systems or
> more application development? My experience is that C is very much
> alive and well in the embedded realm but much less common now in the
> application development field.
I don't think many large applications are using C. I think it's more
common to use OOP for GUI programs.
At the system level, C is alive and well (linux, BSD, probably much of
Windows internals)
Apple of course uses Objective C
-- Martin K
2011\10\15@081434
by
mcd
M.L wrote:
> I don't think many large applications are using C. I think it's
> more common to use OOP for GUI programs.
One of the more common models I see is to write the application core in C
and the GUI in Python. Until you hit the GUI, C is quite portable across
platforms, and there are a number of GUI libraries for Python that are
also portable. This allows a developer to write a reasonably fast
application that is easily portable across Windows, Mac and Linux
platforms.
I personally tend to gravitate toward C for non-PIC platforms, and use C++
when I expect the app to get more complex, but I see far fewer C++ apps in
the wild than I would expect. Of course, in the M$ environment there is a
lot of C#, but in spite of the portability offered by Mono, it doesn't
seem to be all that common outside the M$ world.
--McD
2011\10\17@110213
by
John Ferrell
|
On 10/15/2011 8:23 AM, mcd
spam_OUTis-sixsigma.com wrote:
> M.L wrote:
>
>> I don't think many large applications are using C. I think it's
>> more common to use OOP for GUI programs.
> One of the more common models I see is to write the application core in C
> and the GUI in Python. Until you hit the GUI, C is quite portable across
> platforms, and there are a number of GUI libraries for Python that are
> also portable. This allows a developer to write a reasonably fast
> application that is easily portable across Windows, Mac and Linux
> platforms.
>
> I personally tend to gravitate toward C for non-PIC platforms, and use C++
> when I expect the app to get more complex, but I see far fewer C++ apps in
> the wild than I would expect. Of course, in the M$ environment there is a
> lot of C#, but in spite of the portability offered by Mono, it doesn't
> seem to be all that common outside the M$ world.
>
> --McD
>
>
IMHO:
I keep hearing my Nerd brothers & sisters saying that c is obsolete and no longer relevant. I beg to differ. The skinny little K & R book with its simple and concise language definition remains the foundation of the industry. Many of us who have tried to keep up with too many things changing too fast think of K & R c as generic assembler. When a new computer is first designed there are really only two choices when it comes to making it marketable: you must have either a c compiler or a cross compiler that supports it from a pre existing host. One way or another you must not expect to retrain all the programmers. Cross compilers are quick & dirty solutions that can get a product running quickly. The native c compilers take a little time & talent to create and permit the programmer to wring every bit of performance from the hardware.
Further IMHO:
Nearly all of the compilers I have looked at recently imitate c in structure with embellishments (and limitations) inspired by FORTRAN or COBOL. I am not criticizing, just observing.
I don't consider myself a programmer at all. I am just a very old student in the world of computers. I try to not get involved with micro's that do not have some sort of free c-compilers anymore. Life is too short to waste building new tools that are no better than the originals..
We have lost one of the Giants of our time...
-- John Ferrell W8CCW
2011\10\17@111957
by
alan.b.pearce
The link in the first post on this Microchip Forum entry has an interesting piece on him.
http://www.microchip.com/forums/m607447.aspx
Incidentally this forum entry was where I first learned of his death.
-- Scanned by iCritical.
2011\10\17@112239
by
slippyr4
On 15 October 2011 09:08, Chris McSweeny <@spam@cpmcsweenyKILLspam
gmail.com> wrote:
> Personally I tend to use C++ even for embedded stuff in a professional
> capacity nowadays - though I'm generally talking about more complex
> processors than PICs in that case. Or were you suggesting the use of
> something not related to C at all (which is in reality unlikely -
> languages like Java surely owe a lot to C)?
>
>
OOI, are you really using C++ for embedded? or in fact plain old C
2011\10\17@112921
by
William \Chops\ Westfield
>> I don't think many large applications are using C.
C++, C#, and even Java are pretty much descendants of C.
If I were the father of C, I wouldn't feel like my work had been abandoned...
BillW
2011\10\17@133725
by
Wouter van Ooijen
> OOI, are you really using C++ for embedded? or in fact plain old C ?
(not OOI) I use C++ when possible (LPC ARM chips, starting with Cortex now), C (or Jal!) on smaller chips (12/14 bit cores, 18F's).
FYI: I started a blog (series of articles) about using C++ on microcontrollers (next installment will use an LPC1114 as an example): http://www.embeddedrelated.com/blogs-1//Wouter_van_Ooijen.php
--
Wouter van Ooijen
-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu
More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2011
, 2012 only
- Today
- New search...