Future of C++ and Visual C++ within MS
-
Ed.Poore wrote:
32K
I think I have a texture somewhere that small.... ;) but I might have to rumage and search for a while....
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Suprisingly lately we've been using quite a few of these in small systems because they tend to be quite efficient and not doing much. The main processor used in our embedded systems has about 138K of RAM & ROM combined, and operates at 20MHz. Most of the time though it's drawing <5mW of power, so compare that to your systems :-D, now who's green :rolleyes:. Reason I say normally is that when it's not in standby it usually draws around 100mW but it's switched off most of the time because most processing is now being done in FPGAs so much much much faster (think speed of light :cool: and you're not far off).
Ed.Poore wrote:
The main processor used in our embedded systems has about 138K of RAM & ROM combined, and operates at 20MHz.
Yup, used them before. I didn't always do 3D graphics on err... green... machines. ;) I've done embedded work for various projects. When you are hanging a package from a 3 mile length of kevlar rope and aiming a missile at it (hoping you take the target hanging below, not the package above), you want it all to be cheap, light, low-power and ... well... inexpensive (in labor not just materials, plug-n-err... pray) just in case you have a .... near-miss that hits the package instead of the target (which has happened). Also, if you are putting a telecommunication package on a mini-helicopter, again all the samethings apply. :)
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
[Message Deleted]
-
Ed.Poore wrote:
The main processor used in our embedded systems has about 138K of RAM & ROM combined, and operates at 20MHz.
Yup, used them before. I didn't always do 3D graphics on err... green... machines. ;) I've done embedded work for various projects. When you are hanging a package from a 3 mile length of kevlar rope and aiming a missile at it (hoping you take the target hanging below, not the package above), you want it all to be cheap, light, low-power and ... well... inexpensive (in labor not just materials, plug-n-err... pray) just in case you have a .... near-miss that hits the package instead of the target (which has happened). Also, if you are putting a telecommunication package on a mini-helicopter, again all the samethings apply. :)
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Ed.Poore wrote:
Isn't that standard for Windows?
true... but I was thinking even hardware interfacing. Hehe, though we did have an embedded Windows machine come crashing down from about 14 feet in height.... with camera attached with USB connections to hardware.... amazingly enough everything but the USB hub survived the fall, though only because we had just shut down the hardware at the time.... I am trying to imagine a disk seek/write on a 14foot pole that decided it wanted to play hammer-time....
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
are you sure that's not cache ram and it needs an external memory connection?
-- You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
-
[Message Deleted]
-
C++ is "not yet extinct" at Microsoft. Quite the contrary: "Central to the success of these customers, as well as Microsoft's own internal development, is Visual C++." Hard to believe ... :suss: http://blogs.msdn.com/sripod/archive/2007/06/26/future-of-c-and-visual-c-within-ms-and-elsewhere.aspx[^]
Well, could be true of C++ rather than the VC++ dev environment experience. I gather a lot of MS devs don't use Visual Studio for C++ development.
Kevin
-
Ed.Poore wrote:
Isn't that standard for Windows?
true... but I was thinking even hardware interfacing. Hehe, though we did have an embedded Windows machine come crashing down from about 14 feet in height.... with camera attached with USB connections to hardware.... amazingly enough everything but the USB hub survived the fall, though only because we had just shut down the hardware at the time.... I am trying to imagine a disk seek/write on a 14foot pole that decided it wanted to play hammer-time....
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
are you sure that's not cache ram and it needs an external memory connection?
-- You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
No that'd be program RAM & ROM, you could probably write a small boot loader which goes off and reads more program from an EEPROM but why not shell out a few more pence and get a bigger one. There are applications for such small micros, for example some simple switch devices etc.
-
Well, could be true of C++ rather than the VC++ dev environment experience. I gather a lot of MS devs don't use Visual Studio for C++ development.
Kevin
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
I gather a lot of MS devs don't use Visual Studio for C++ development.
A lot don't, but the vast majority do. At one point during the VS 2005 roll out someone from Microsoft admitted this very thing. It begs the question, then, of why C/C++ support sucks so bad in VS 2005. (Okay, okay, I know the answer--idiots in marketing.) I am quite sure the number of .NET developers has soared in the past two years. I'm equally confident that Visual Studio, in general, is still mostly used for C/C++ development. Based on first hand experience, though, Microsoft dropped the ball so badly with VS 2005 and C++, that it's up in the air whether C++ developer make up the majority of that specific version. (For all it's ills, I still push it. The compiler is fantastic and the whistles and bells, however, buggy, make it worthwhile. The CRT, however, desparately needs a code bloat reduction--something that's been true for years.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
I gather a lot of MS devs don't use Visual Studio for C++ development.
A lot don't, but the vast majority do. At one point during the VS 2005 roll out someone from Microsoft admitted this very thing. It begs the question, then, of why C/C++ support sucks so bad in VS 2005. (Okay, okay, I know the answer--idiots in marketing.) I am quite sure the number of .NET developers has soared in the past two years. I'm equally confident that Visual Studio, in general, is still mostly used for C/C++ development. Based on first hand experience, though, Microsoft dropped the ball so badly with VS 2005 and C++, that it's up in the air whether C++ developer make up the majority of that specific version. (For all it's ills, I still push it. The compiler is fantastic and the whistles and bells, however, buggy, make it worthwhile. The CRT, however, desparately needs a code bloat reduction--something that's been true for years.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
Joe Woodbury wrote:
The CRT, however, desparately needs a code bloat reduction--something that's been true for years.)
hmmmm decades.... :-D
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
I gather a lot of MS devs don't use Visual Studio for C++ development.
A lot don't, but the vast majority do. At one point during the VS 2005 roll out someone from Microsoft admitted this very thing. It begs the question, then, of why C/C++ support sucks so bad in VS 2005. (Okay, okay, I know the answer--idiots in marketing.) I am quite sure the number of .NET developers has soared in the past two years. I'm equally confident that Visual Studio, in general, is still mostly used for C/C++ development. Based on first hand experience, though, Microsoft dropped the ball so badly with VS 2005 and C++, that it's up in the air whether C++ developer make up the majority of that specific version. (For all it's ills, I still push it. The compiler is fantastic and the whistles and bells, however, buggy, make it worthwhile. The CRT, however, desparately needs a code bloat reduction--something that's been true for years.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
Joe Woodbury wrote:
It begs the question, then, of why C/C++ support sucks so bad in VS 2005.
Indeed. So why aren't Microsoft themselves pissed off about it? They must surely find it as painful as everyone else does. (Well, I'm not talking about me because I've only ever done C# and VB in the .NET-era IDEs. Apart from sluggish performance the IDE is otherwise super for them.)
Kevin
-
.NET Micro Framework[^] requires 256KB of RAM and 512KB of Flash/ROM. There's no separate kernel on this - .NET Micro Framework is the operating system. I think they cheat though - the code is not JITted but compiled to native code at ROM build time.
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
-
.NET Micro Framework[^] requires 256KB of RAM and 512KB of Flash/ROM. There's no separate kernel on this - .NET Micro Framework is the operating system. I think they cheat though - the code is not JITted but compiled to native code at ROM build time.
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
-
C++ is "not yet extinct" at Microsoft. Quite the contrary: "Central to the success of these customers, as well as Microsoft's own internal development, is Visual C++." Hard to believe ... :suss: http://blogs.msdn.com/sripod/archive/2007/06/26/future-of-c-and-visual-c-within-ms-and-elsewhere.aspx[^]
Nice to know I'm not learning a doomed language. Well, at least not doomed YET.
Ravel H. Joyce - Well I say that sticking a balloon to your head IS a scientific experiment!
-
Nice to know I'm not learning a doomed language. Well, at least not doomed YET.
Ravel H. Joyce - Well I say that sticking a balloon to your head IS a scientific experiment!
Of course, even if it were doomed it would only be in the MS world that this is the case.
Kevin