Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: Chris H <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:12:55 +0100
In message <4811D3FC.421D6AD5@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Walter Banks <walter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
cbarn24050@xxxxxxx wrote:
> A layer of a stack on a PIC with only 8 levels (In one case 2 levels)
> has a big impact the available subroutine return stack.
Hence the need to avoid C altogether.
I think you confusing the limitations of the silicon with the
language tools you are using. Anything that can be written
in asm for a PIC I can write in C in the same space.
You won't convince him. Some people just argue for the sake of it and have "religious" beliefs rather than engineering common sense. :-(
It's like people arguing over 35mm film V DSLR or CD verses LP's. They are blinded by numbers and theoretical arguments etc.
In reality C has been used on many safety critical systems. Errors that have caused multiple fatalities have been caused by assembler (FADEC). The Arianne 5 rocket crashed and that had flight controls written in Ada. It is not about the language.
The other thing that really pisses me off is that all programmers who produce commercial tools are always assumed to be lying or not presenting the truth or in some way biassed in any discussion of tools.
Yet programmers who are paid to produce software other than these tools are always totally honest. (And FOSS types always walk on water they are so saintly and have no bias whatsoever even if they do produce other commercial SW or systems)
Walter has always been (AFAIKCS) completely honest and open (NDA's not withstanding) on this NG. The fact he has earned a good living writing tools he sells for longer than he cares to admit should point to his honesty. Unless all the people he sells his tools to are complete idiots or deluded?
Given Walters involvement in the automotive industry and the amount of SW created with Bytecraft compilers that is in vehicles currently on the road we KNOW his tools are good. Otherwise you would have automotive SW failing all over the place.
Of course as I distribute Bytecraft (for money) anything I say must be null and void I suppose?
The argument that I distribute certain tools because in my professional opinion, as a developer for many years and some one who works with Walter on international standards, they are good reliable tools will not hold water with the nay -sayers because I can not be trusted because it is commercial..... :-)
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
.
- References:
- mixing C and assembly
- From: Lax
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: Hans-Bernhard Bröker
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: Chris H
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: Walter Banks
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: Mark Borgerson
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: Walter Banks
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: Stefan Reuther
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: Walter Banks
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: cbarn24050
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: David Brown
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: Walter Banks
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: CBFalconer
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: cbarn24050
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: Walter Banks
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: cbarn24050
- Re: mixing C and assembly
- From: Walter Banks
- mixing C and assembly
- Prev by Date: Re: AC spike go pass XFRM and regulator to reset CPU!!??
- Next by Date: Re: C and MISRA, blues... (arithmetic shifts)
- Previous by thread: Re: mixing C and assembly
- Next by thread: Re: mixing C and assembly
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|