home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.nyu.edu!schonberg!dewar
- From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
- 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: 19 Apr 1996 00:29:59 -0400
- Organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
- Message-ID: <dewar.829888105@schonberg>
- References: <316BF0C5.1FE1@condat.de> <316D2A88.10B6@sdt.com> <316EE3B4.7E68@iastate.edu> <Pine.OSF.3.91.960418170121.24336A-100000@bud.cc.swin.edu.au>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: schonberg.cs.nyu.edu
- X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 (NOV)
-
- Newbs said
-
- "But if you take into account these implications and try to avoid them,
- you become a hacker."
-
- (these implications = overhead of destructors etc.)
-
- Probably there was a :-) missing, but if the above was serious, I stronl
- strongly disagree. All programmers should understand the consequences
- of the code they write. I certainly agree that both in Ada 95 and
- in C++, programmers use finalization (destructors) with great abandon
- without the least bit idea of the overhead being introduced.
-
-