Object Oriented programming is only a style, but there are languages such as C++ which have tailored themselves to that style, making it exponentially easier to program, ex. the entire class structure.
Printable View
Object Oriented programming is only a style, but there are languages such as C++ which have tailored themselves to that style, making it exponentially easier to program, ex. the entire class structure.
It's not because C++ is too bloated. It's just that it's easier to create a C compiler than a C++ compiler, and since embedded programs are typically small - no one complains :)Quote:
If you're programming on microcontrollers and the like, you are more likely to be using C than C++ (as it is, I believe, considered too bloated for such applications), but perhaps someone with more experience with this can elaborate.
The size and memory usage of a C++ progarm compared to a similar C program is larger on both cases (most of the time). So there are times when it comes down to needing a smaller package. Considering the vast number of platforms that GCC can compile to (even doing cross platform compiling) its not that hard to write a C++ program for an embedded system.Quote:
Originally Posted by bithub
> I have heard that C++ is almost a superset of C.
C++ is a semantic superset of C (all the concepts of C are also in C++).
C++ is not however a syntactic superset of C. Not all valid C programs can be compiled as C++, and not all valid C programs which can be compiled with C++ will produce identical results.
http://david.tribble.com/text/cdiffs.htm