home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: Starbase.NeoSoft.COM!not-for-mail
- From: timd@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (Tim Dugan)
- Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.lang.c++,comp.realtime,comp.dcom.telecom.tech,comp.arch.embedded
- Subject: Re: Can OO be successful in real-time embedded systems?
- Date: 11 Apr 1996 12:34:41 -0500
- Organization: NeoSoft, Inc. +1 713 968 5800
- Message-ID: <4kjfrh$28g@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
- References: <316BF0C5.1FE1@condat.de> <RMARTIN.96Apr11113222@rcm.oma.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: starbase.neosoft.com
-
- In article <RMARTIN.96Apr11113222@rcm.oma.com>,
- Robert C. Martin <rmartin@oma.com> wrote:
- >In article <316BF0C5.1FE1@condat.de> Henning Rietz <rietz@condat.de> writes:
- >[...]
- > - "OO systems are too slow"
- > - "OO systems eat up too much memory"
- >[...]
- >
- >What is it that would make OO slow? [...]
- >
- >As to memory, C++ requires a bit more memory for managing the virtual
- >tables. [...]
-
- Although I have no figures or measurements, I would have to say
- that I suspect that the one area where C++ is slower is that
- there is something about C++ that encourages programmers to
- perform a great deal more allocation and de-allocation of
- memory, causing memory fragmentation and slowing the allocation/
- deallocation process.
-
- This is partially a problem of style, using pointers and
- performing "new" when a non-pointer will work. As classes
- are constructed of classes which are constructed...etc...
- a constructor call can cause numerous allocations of small
- bits of memory.
-
- I know that some groups try to restrict real time software in
- Ada to not allocating heap space but only stack space. I suppose
- you could do this in C++, too. But, generally, that doesn't
- seem necessary.
-
- -t
- --
- Tim Dugan
- mailto:timd@starbase.neosoft.com
- http://starbase.neosoft.com/~timd
-